Post-traumatic and OA-related lesions in the knee at baseline and 2 years after traumatic meniscal injury: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the presence of early degenerative changes on Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) 24 months after a traumatic meniscal tear and to compare these changes in patients treated with arthroscopic partial meniscectomy or physical therapy plus optional delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy. DESIGN: We included patients aged 18-45 years with a recent onset, traumatic, MRI verified, isolated meniscal tear without radiographic osteoarthritis. Patients were randomized to arthroscopic partial meniscectomy or standardized physical therapy with optional delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy. MRIs at baseline and 24 months were scored using the MRI Osteoarthritis Knee Score (MOAKS). We compared baseline MRIs to healthy controls aged 18-40 years. The outcome was the progression of bone marrow lesions (BMLs), cartilage defects and osteophytes after 24 months in patients. RESULTS: We included 99 patients and 50 controls. At baseline, grade 2 and 3 BMLs were present in 26% of the patients (n = 26), compared to 2% of the controls (n = 1) (between group difference 24% (95% CI 15% to 34%)). In patients, 35% (n = 35) had one or more cartilage defects grade 1 or higher, compared to 2% of controls (n = 1) (between group difference 33% (95% CI 23% to 44%)). At 24 months MRI was available for 40 patients randomized to arthroscopic partial meniscectomy and 41 patients randomized to physical therapy. At 24 months 30% (n = 12) of the patients randomized to arthroscopic partial meniscectomy showed BML worsening, compared to 22% (n = 9) of the patients randomized to physical therapy (between group difference 8% (95% CI -11% to 27%)). Worsening of cartilage defects was present in 40% (n = 16) of the arthroscopic partial meniscectomy group, compared to 22% (n = 9) of the physical therapy group (between group difference 18% (95% CI -2% to 38%)). Of the patients who had no cartilage defect at baseline, 33% of the arthroscopic partial meniscectomy group had a new cartilage defect at follow-up compared to 14% of the physical therapy group. Osteophyte worsening was present in 18% (n = 7) of the arthroscopic partial meniscectomy group and 15% (n = 6) of the physical therapy group (between group difference 3% (95% CI -13% to 19%)). CONCLUSIONS: Our results might suggest more worsening of BMLs and cartilage defects with arthroscopic partial meniscectomy compared to physical therapy with optional delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy at 24-month follow-up in young patients with isolated traumatic meniscal tears without radiographic OA.

Cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus physical therapy for traumatic meniscal tears in patients aged under 45 years.

Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus physical therapy plus optional delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy in young patients aged under 45 years with traumatic meniscal tears. Methods: We conducted a multicentre, open-labelled, randomized controlled trial in patients aged 18 to 45 years, with a recent onset, traumatic, MRI-verified, isolated meniscal tear without knee osteoarthritis. Patients were randomized to arthroscopic partial meniscectomy or standardized physical therapy with an optional delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy after three months of follow-up. We performed a cost-utility analysis on the randomization groups to compare both treatments over a 24-month follow-up period. Cost utility was calculated as incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy compared to physical therapy. Calculations were performed from a healthcare system perspective and a societal perspective. Results: A total of 100 patients were included: 49 were randomized to arthroscopic partial meniscectomy and 51 to physical therapy. In the physical therapy group, 21 patients (41%) received delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy during follow-up. Over 24 months, patients in the arthroscopic partial meniscectomy group had a mean 0.005 QALYs lower quality of life (95% confidence interval -0.13 to 0.14). The cost-utility ratio was €-160,000/QALY from the healthcare perspective and €-223,372/QALY from the societal perspective, indicating that arthroscopic partial meniscectomy incurs additional costs without any added health benefit. Conclusion: Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy is arthroscopic partial meniscectomy is unlikely to be cost-effective in treating young patients with isolated traumatic meniscal tears compared to physical therapy as a primary health intervention. Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy leads to a similar quality of life, but higher costs, compared to physical therapy plus optional delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy.

Meniscal procedures are not increased with delayed ACL reconstruction and rehabilitation: results from a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether initial non-operative treatment of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) ruptures with optional delayed ACL reconstruction leads to more meniscal procedures compared with early ACL reconstruction during the 2-year follow-up. METHODS: We compared the number of meniscal procedures of 167 patients with an ACL rupture, who either received early ACL reconstruction (n=85) or rehabilitation therapy plus optional delayed ACL reconstruction (n=82), participating in the Conservative vs Operative Methods for Patients with ACL Rupture Evaluation trial. Patients were aged 18 to 65 years (mean 31.3, SD 10.5), 60% male sex (n=100). We evaluated the presence and location of meniscal tears by baseline MRI. We analysed and compared how many patients per randomisation group had a meniscal procedure during follow-up in the ACL injured knee, adjusted for sex, body mass index, age group and orthopaedic surgeon. RESULTS: At baseline, 41% of the entire study population (69/167 patients) had a meniscal tear on MRI. During the 2-year follow-up, 25 patients randomised to early ACL reconstruction (29%, 25/85 patients) had a meniscal procedure, compared with 17 patients randomised to rehabilitation plus optional delayed reconstruction (21%, 17/82 patients) (risk ratio 0.67 with 95% CI 0.40 to 1.12, p=0.12). Of these patients who received early ACL reconstruction (n=82) and patients that received delayed ACL reconstruction (n=41), 5% of the patients had an additional isolated meniscal procedure after ACL reconstruction. In patients who received no ACL reconstruction (n=41), 10% (n=4) had an isolated surgical procedure for a meniscal tear during the 2-year follow-up period. CONCLUSION: Initial non-surgical treatment of ACL ruptures followed by optional delayed ACL reconstruction does not lead to a higher number of meniscal procedures compared with early ACL reconstruction over a 2-year follow-up period. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NL 2618.

Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus physical therapy for traumatic meniscal tears in a young study population: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes from arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus physical therapy in young patients with traumatic meniscal tears. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, open-labelled, randomised controlled trial in patients aged 18-45 years, with a recent onset, traumatic, MRI-verified, isolated meniscal tear without knee osteoarthritis. Patients were randomised to arthroscopic partial meniscectomy or standardised physical therapy with an optional delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy after 3-month follow-up. The primary outcome was the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score (best 100, worst 0) at 24 months, which measures patients' perception of symptoms, knee function and ability to participate in sports activities. RESULTS: Between 2014 and 2018, 100 patients were included (mean age 35.1 (SD 8.1), 76% male, 34 competitive or elite athletes). Forty-nine were randomised to arthroscopic partial meniscectomy and 51 to physical therapy. In the physical therapy group, 21 patients (41%) received delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy during the follow-up period. In both groups, improvement in IKDC scores was clinically relevant during follow-up compared with baseline scores. At 24 months mean (95% CI) IKDC scores were 78 (71 to 84) out of 100 points in the arthroscopic partial meniscectomy group and 78 (71 to 84) in the physical therapy group with a between group difference of 0.1 (95% CI -7.6 to 7.7) points out of 100. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving young patients with isolated traumatic meniscal tears, early arthroscopic partial meniscectomy was not superior to a strategy of physical therapy with optional delayed arthroscopic partial meniscectomy at 24-month follow-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://www.trialregister.nl/trials.

Why, When, and in Which Patients Nonoperative Treatment of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury Fails: An Exploratory Analysis of the COMPARE Trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment strategy for patients with an anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) rupture is still under debate. Different determinants of the need for a reconstruction have not been thoroughly investigated before. PURPOSE: To investigate why, when, and which patients with an ACL rupture who initially started with rehabilitation therapy required reconstructive surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: In the Conservative versus Operative Methods for Patients with ACL Rupture Evaluation (COMPARE) trial, 167 patients with an ACL rupture were randomized to early ACL reconstruction or rehabilitation therapy plus optional delayed ACL reconstruction. We conducted an exploratory analysis of a subgroup of 82 patients from this trial who were randomized to rehabilitation therapy plus optional delayed ACL reconstruction. The reasons for surgery were registered for the patients who underwent a delayed ACL reconstruction. For these patients, we used the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee form, Numeric Rating Scale for pain, and instability question from the Lysholm questionnaire before surgery. To determine between-group differences between the nonoperative treatment and delayed ACL reconstruction group, IKDC and pain scores during follow-up were determined using mixed models and adjusted for sex, age, and body mass index. RESULTS: During the 2-year follow-up of the trial, 41 of the 82 patients received a delayed ACL reconstruction after a median time of 6.4 months after inclusion (interquartile range, 3.9-10.3 months). Most reconstructions occurred between 3 and 6 months after inclusion (n = 17; 41.5%). Ninety percent of the patients (n = 37) reported knee instability concerns as a reason for surgery at the moment of planning surgery. Of these patients, 18 had an IKDC score ≤60, 29 had a pain score of ≥3, and 33 patients had knee instability concerns according to the Lysholm questionnaire before surgery. During follow-up, IKDC scores were lower and pain scores were higher in the delayed reconstruction group compared with the nonoperative treatment group. Patients in the delayed reconstruction group had a significantly younger age (27.4 vs 35.3 years; P = .001) and higher preinjury activity level compared with patients in the nonoperative treatment group. CONCLUSION: Patients who experienced instability concerns, had pain during activity, and had a low perception of their knee function had unsuccessful nonoperative treatment. Most patients received a delayed ACL reconstruction after 3 to 6 months of rehabilitation therapy. At baseline, patients who required reconstructive surgery had a younger age and higher preinjury activity level compared with patients who did not undergo reconstruction.