Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy provides no benefit over sham surgery in the setting of isolated degenerative medial meniscal tears without osteoarthritis.

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Comparison of gait characteristics between affected and unaffected sides in patients with meniscus lesions: insights from dynamic analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025
   Article
2. Large medial meniscus extrusion and varus are poor prognostic factors of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for degenerative medial meniscus lesions.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2022
   Article
3. A positive viewpoint regarding arthroscopy for degenerative knee conditions.Acta orthopaedica · 2014
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus sham surgery for a degenerative meniscal tear.2013

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as