Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39118448›Full record

SynthesisKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2025

Centralization reduces meniscal extrusion, improves joint mechanics and functional outcomes in patients undergoing meniscus surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Khalis Boksh, Duncan E T Shepherd, Daniel M Espino, Arijit Ghosh, Randeep Aujla, Tarek Boutefnouchet

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

6 authors.

Khalis BokshDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3261-0359
Duncan E T ShepherdDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Daniel M EspinoDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Arijit GhoshLeicester Academic Knee Unit, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.
Randeep AujlaLeicester Academic Knee Unit, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.
Tarek BoutefnouchetDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the existing literature on meniscal centralisation procedures, analysing its impact on meniscal extrusion, joint biomechanics and clinical and radiological outcome measures.

methodsThe Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, PubMed (MEDLINE) and Embase were used to perform a systematic review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria. Biomechanical studies on healthy animal or human cadaveric knee joints that assessed meniscal extrusion or tibiofemoral contact mechanics (contact area and pressure) following centralization for meniscal pathologies were included. For clinical studies, those that prospectively or retrospectively assessed patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), postoperative knee motion, complications and radiological extrusion following centralization for meniscal pathologies were included.

resultsFifteen studies were included in the analysis, comprising eight biomechanical, six clinical and one both. There were 92 knee specimens for biomechanical testing, of which 40 were human cadaveric and 52 porcine models. Biomechanical data revealed centralization to be commonly performed for posterior meniscal root tears and significantly reduced extrusion and contact pressure whilst improving contact area following a tear (p < 0.00001). Centralization restored extrusion to that of the native knee at all flexion angles described (0-90°, p = 0.25) and, compared to the torn state, brought tibiofemoral contact mechanics 3.2-5.0 times closer to the native state. Clinical data showed that 158 patients underwent centralization for extrusion. It improved postoperative Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome score (KOOS) (p = 0.006) and Lysholm scores (p < 0.00001) at 25.0 months, maintained extrusion reduction at 17.1 months (p < 0.00001) and preserved knee motion.

conclusionCentralisation for various meniscal injuries associated with extrusion can reduce meniscal extrusion and improve joint biomechanics, along with clinical and radiological outcomes. Existing evidence is still scarce and exhibits a notable amount of methodological heterogeneity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review of Level IV evidence.

Indexed as

Knee JointMenisci, TibialTibial Meniscus InjuriesAnimalsBiomechanical PhenomenaHumansRange of Motion, Articularcentralizationmeniscal extrusionmeniscal tearsmeniscotibial ligamentosteoarthritis

Identifiers

PMID39118448
PMCPMC11848986

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.