Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36517773›Full record

ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2022

Medial meniscus posterior root tear reconstructed with gracilis autograft improve healing rate and patient reported outcome measures.

Hongbo Li, Si Nie, Min Lan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hongbo Li *Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Jiangxi Provincial People's Hospital (The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang Medical College), No.92 Aiguo Road, Donghu District, 330006, Nanchang, Jiangxi Province, People's Republic of China.
Si Nie *Department of Radiology, Jiangxi Provincial People's Hospital (The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang Medical College), Nanchang, 330006, People's Republic of China.
Min LanDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Jiangxi Provincial People's Hospital (The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang Medical College), No.92 Aiguo Road, Donghu District, 330006, Nanchang, Jiangxi Province, People's Republic of China. guihai864014948@163.com.
Jiangxi Provincial People's Hospital · CNFirst Affiliated Hospital of Jiangxi Medical College · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany surgeries have not reversed or prevented progressive symptomatic knee arthritis, and there is no consensus regarding the ideal repair or reconstruction technique for meniscal root treatment. Additionally, there is a lack of studies comparing the clinical efficacy evaluation of different repair techniques. The aim of the present study is to compare the clinical efficacy and healing rates of meniscus root in the treatment of medial meniscus posterior root tear (MMPRT) with the arthroscopically assisted meniscus root reconstruction with gracilis autograft and transtibial pull-out technique.

methodsPatients with MMPRT (type II) who received treatment of posterior meniscus root attachment point through the tibial tunnel between January 2018 and April 2019 were included in this study. Patients were divided into 2 groups (arthroscopically assisted gracilis autograft reconstruction technique: 29 cases; transtibial pull-out technique group: 35 cases) according to the different treatment methods. The mean follow-up period was 26.9 ± 2.3 months. The demographics, functional recovery of the knee, and meniscus root healing rates (assessed using knee magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at the final follow-up) were compared between the two groups.

resultsThere was a statistically significant improvement in the Lysholm score, international knee documentation committee (IKDC) score, and visual analogue scale (VAS) score (P < 0.001 in both groups). Additionally, compared with the transtibial pull-out repair group, the arthroscopically assisted reconstruction with gracilis autograft showed significant improvement in the meniscus root healing rates, Lysholm score, and IKDC score at the end of follow-up (P < 0.05).

conclusionsCompared with the transtibial pull-out technique, the arthroscopically assisted meniscus root reconstruction with gracilis autograft was advantageous for treating these patients with superior clinical outcome and higher meniscus root healing rates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Indexed as

Menisci, TibialTibial Meniscus InjuriesArthroscopyAutograftsHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresRetrospective StudiesRuptureArthroscopically assisted reconstruction techniqueGracilis autograftMagnetic resonance imagingMedial meniscal root tearTranstibial pull-out repair

Identifiers

PMID36517773
PMCPMC9749208
OpenAlexW4311481298

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.