SynthesisInternational orthopaedics2022
Outcomes and failure rates after revision meniscal repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in International orthopaedics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Meniscal Repair in the Setting of Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: 6-Year Follow-up Results From the MARS Cohort.The American journal of sports medicine · 2025Article
- A Review of Revision Meniscal Repair: Clinical Considerations and Outcomes.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2025Review
- High failure rate in meniscal repair when preceding anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: An analysis of two-stage surgery for concomitant ACL injury and traumatic meniscus tear.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025Article
- Effects of TGF-β3 on meniscus repair using human amniotic epithelial cells.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Recurrent Meniscal Instability Requiring Revision Repair 28 Years After the Initial Repair for a Bucket Handle Medial Meniscus Tear: A Case Report.Case reports in orthopedics · 2025Article
- Association Between MRI Signal Intensity of the Repaired Lateral Meniscus and Residual Anterolateral Knee Laxity After ACL Reconstruction.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
- Meniscal Radial Tears: A Classification System Based on Tear Morphology.Arthroscopy techniques · 2024Article
- Meniscus Radial Tears: Current Concepts on Management and Repair Techniques.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this meta-analysis is to determine the outcomes and failure rates for revision meniscus repairs in patients with re-tears after primary repair failure.
methodsA literature search was conducted using PubMed and Embase with the terms "Meniscus," "Meniscal," "Revised," and "Revision." The search strategy was based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Meta-Analyses) protocol and included four articles (79 patients). The search criteria were limited to studies reporting outcomes and failure rates. The exclusion criteria included languages other than English, biomechanical studies, letters to editors, non-full text, review articles, meta-analysis, and case reports.
resultsFour comparative studies with 79 patients (53 males, 26 females) with a mean age of 23.9 ± 6.4 years treated with a revision meniscus repair were included in the final analysis. Within this analysis, we found a failure rate of 25.3% (20 of 79 patients). Of these failed repairs, 30.95% (13 of 42) were of the medial meniscus, and 18.9% (7 of 37) were of the lateral meniscus. In the four articles, the postoperative Tegner sports activity score was found to be 6.1 ± 1.6 (range, 2 to 10). The post-operative Lysholm score was reported in three articles (45 patients). At a mean follow-up of 58.3 ± 23.9 months, the mean post-operative Lysholm score was 89.1 ± 7.6 (range, 38 to 100). The Coleman score for the included articles ranged between 52 and 59.
conclusionThis analysis found that revision meniscus repairs in patients with re-tears after primary repair failure result in clinical outcomes similar to that of primary repairs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35477793What 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.