PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11357692

[Meniscus reconstruction. Established and innovative methods].

Abstract

After the first description of meniscus repairs in the literature it took nearly a century until they were routinely performed in orthopaedic surgery. The scientific basis for meniscus reconstruction needed to be elaborated, including the study of the anatomy, and for instance the vascularisation and the function of the meniscus. After the first experiences with open repair, several arthroscopic techniques have been developed. It has been shown that several factors could influence the healing rate of meniscus lesions. One of the major factors is knee stability. Meniscus repairs performed in conjunction with reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) have shown higher healing rates (generally > 75%) than isolated repairs, either in stable (50-75% healing rate) or in unstable knees (< 50% in some studies). The localization of the tear is probably the most important factor influencing the healing rate of meniscus repairs. Peripheral tears which are located in the vascular zone of the meniscus heal better than centrally located tears in the avascular area. Many efforts have been provided to enhance the vascularity in this part of the meniscus. None of the proposed techniques have been proven to be definitively effective, or they are too demanding for routine use. Conventional meniscus suture techniques are time-consuming, technically demanding and necessitate incisions at risk for neurovascular structures. In order to simplify meniscus repair several new implants have been developed. They have different forms and are made of different materials among which some are biodegradable. The first clinical results with these techniques are encouraging. However, some new complications have been described. Their incidence and the fate of intraarticular biodegradable devices still has to be defined, especially in the long-term. The present study describes the actual knowledge of meniscus repair and presents the new techniques. It also shows that several questions concerning meniscus repair still need to be answered, and points out the need for further controlled studies.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

R Seil, D Kohn. 2001. [Meniscus reconstruction. Established and innovative methods].. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001130050728

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effects of initial graft tension on the tibiofemoral compressive forces and joint position after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: The initial tension applied to an anterior cruciate ligament graft at the time of fixation modulates knee motion and the tibiofemoral compressive loads. PURPOSE: To establish the relationships between initial graft tension, tibiofemoral compressive force, and the neutral tibiofemoral position in the cadaveric knee. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: The tibiofemoral compressive forces and joint positions were determined in the anterior cruciate ligament-intact knee at 0 degrees , 20 degrees , and 90 degrees of knee flexion. The anterior cruciate ligament was excised and reconstructed with a patellar tendon graft using graft tensions of 1, 15, 30, 60, and 90 N applied at 0 degrees , 20 degrees , and 90 degrees of knee flexion. The compressive forces and neutral positions were compared between initial tension conditions and the anterior cruciate ligament-intact knee. RESULTS: Increasing initial graft tension increased the tibiofemoral compressive forces. The forces in the medial compartment were 1.8 times those in the lateral compartment. The compressive forces were dependent on the knee angle at which the tension was applied. The greatest compressive forces occurred when the graft was tensioned with the knee in extension. An increase in initial graft tension caused the tibia to rotate externally compared with the anterior cruciate ligament-intact knee (1.5 degrees and 7.7 degrees of external rotation when tensioned to 90 N at 0 degrees and 90 degrees of knee flexion, respectively). Increases in initial graft tension also caused a significant posterior translation of the tibia relative to the femur (0.9 and 5.3 mm of posterior translation when tensioned to 90 N at 0 degrees and 90 degrees of knee flexion, respectively). CONCLUSION: Different initial graft tension protocols produced predictable changes in the tibiofemoral compressive forces and joint positions. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The tibiofemoral compressive force and neutral joint position were best replicated with a low graft tension (1-15 N) when using a patellar tendon graft.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament↗

Double-bundle "anatomic" anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a cadaveric study of tunnel positioning with a transtibial technique.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to examine whether a double-bundle anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction with a transtibial approach could position the tibial and femoral tunnels accurately in the native bundle attachments. METHODS: In 21 fresh-frozen knees the tibial and femoral attachments of the anteromedial (AM) and posterolateral (PL) bundles were outlined. The AM tibial tunnel guidewire was drilled with the 65 degree Howell tibial guide (Arthrotek, Warsaw, IN) located against the femur in the extended knee. The PL tibial wire was drilled through a prototype attachment to the Howell guide. Of the knees, 14 were available for the femoral part of the study. The AM femoral guidewire used an aimer offset 3 mm from the over-the-top position. The PL wire was drilled transtibially at 70 degrees of flexion, with external rotation and posterior drawer loads being applied. The plateaus and condyles were photographed and the wire positions measured. RESULTS: With regard to the tibia, 17 of 21 AM wires were in the AM bundle attachment (at 61% and 36% of the natural ACL posteroanterior and mediolateral length, respectively) and 19 of 21 PL wires were in the PL bundle attachment (at 28% and 36% of the posteroanterior and mediolateral length, respectively). With regard to the femur, 12 of 14 AM wires and 9 of 14 PL wires were in the correct native bundle attachment. The AM wire was 3% more shallow than the center of the AM attachment (P = .03) and 6% more superior (P < .001), where 100% was the diameter of the posterior lateral condyle. The PL wire was 4% more shallow than the center of the PL attachment (P = .026) and 6% more superior (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Anatomic and reproducible tibial guidewire positioning was achieved. Femoral wires were reproducibly positioned, but both were superior to and more shallow than the natural ACL bundle attachments, so further development or a different approach is appropriate. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The double-bundle reconstruction aims to restore anterior drawer and rotational stability. This technique ensures anatomic tibial positioning. Further improvements are needed with regard to the femur.

Anterior Cruciate Ligament↗