SynthesisInternational orthopaedics2015
Meniscal scaffolds: results and indications. A systematic literature review.
Synthesis in International orthopaedics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
29 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- No differences in clinical outcome between CMI and Actifit meniscal scaffolds: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2022Pooled it
- Polyurethane meniscal scaffolds lead to better clinical outcomes but worse articular cartilage status and greater absolute meniscal extrusion.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2018Pooled it
- Limited evidence on the use of fibrin clot as an adjunct to meniscal repair with sutures: A systematic review.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Review
- Addressing meniscal deficiency part 2: An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses on meniscal scaffold-based approaches.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2024Review
- Predictors of Long-term Patient-Reported Outcome Measures After Collagen Meniscal Implant for Partial Meniscal Defects.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
- Usefulness of Probing Sensor Device for Evaluating Meniscal Suture and Scaffold Implantation.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
- Placement of a polyurethane implant is not associated with a chondroprotective effect: comparative study with cases of isolated medial meniscectomy with at least five years of follow-up.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- Risk Factors Affecting the Survival Rate of Collagen Meniscal Implant for Partial Meniscal Deficiency: An Analysis of 156 Consecutive Cases at a Mean 10 Years of Follow-up.The American journal of sports medicine · 2022Article
- Lateral collagen meniscus implant (CMI): techniques and outcomes-a narrative review.Annals of joint · 2022Review
- Satisfactory clinical results and low failure rate of medial collagen meniscus implant (CMI) at a minimum 20 years of follow-up.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2021Article
- Minimum 10-Year Clinical Outcome of Lateral Collagen Meniscal Implants for the Replacement of Partial Lateral Meniscal Defects: Further Results From a Prospective Multicenter Study.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2021Article
- Functional and magnetic resonance imaging outcome after polyurethane meniscal scaffold implantation following partial meniscectomy.International orthopaedics · 2021Article
- Biologic Augmentation Reduces the Failure Rate of Meniscal Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2021Review
- Polyurethane scaffold implants for partial meniscus lesions: delayed intervention leads to an inferior outcome.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2021Article
- An Up-to-Date Review of the Meniscus Literature: A Systematic Summary of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2020Review
- Meniscal substitution, a developing and long-awaited demand.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2020Review
- The results of meniscal allograft transplantation surgery: what is success?BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2020Article
- Early Functional Rehabilitation after Meniscus Surgery: Are Currently Used Orthopedic Rehabilitation Standards Up to Date?Rehabilitation research and practice · 2020Article
- From Bench to Bedside: Synthesizing Better Replacements and Reconstructions.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this systematic review was to document the available clinical evidence to support meniscal scaffold implantation, analysing results and indications for the treatment of meniscal loss.
methodsThe systematic review of the literature was performed searching three medical electronic databases: PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Collaboration. The guidelines for preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) were used. Relevant data were then extracted and collected in a unique database with consensus of two observers. To assess the methodological quality of the collected data, the subscales of a modified Coleman methodology score (CMS) were determined.
resultsA total of 23 studies on two scaffolds (CMI, Ivy Sports Medicine GmbH, Germany; Actifit, Orteq, United Kingdom) met the inclusion criteria and were used for the final analysis, of which more than half have been published in the last three years. Good clinical results have been documented in 613 patients, mainly young men affected by symptomatic chronic lesions, with a cumulative failure rate of 6.1% and presence of newly formed tissue documented both at histological and MRI evaluation in most cases. However, there is a lack of comparative trials and the average study quality is low.
conclusionAn increase in publications regarding this topic has been seen recently, due to the introduction in the clinical practice of the second synthetic scaffold. Safety and positive results have been shown for both scaffolds. Although, literature lacks randomized trials at long-term follow-up to confirm real potential and most appropriate indications of meniscal scaffold implantation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24973973What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.