Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39493053›Full record

ReviewCureus2024

Efficacy and Long-Term Outcomes of Arthroscopic Meniscus Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Siddharth Babu Chand, Gayathry Santhosh, Aravind Saseendran, Abhilash V Gopinath, Goutham B Chand, Varsha Viswambharan, Abhishek Gowda Gb, Chetana Rao

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors.

Siddharth Babu ChandDepartment of Orthopaedics, Sree Narayana Institute of Medical Sciences, Kunnukara, IND.
Gayathry SanthoshDepartment of General Surgery, Doctor's Hospital, Ernakulam, IND.
Aravind SaseendranDepartment of Orthopaedics, Sree Narayana Institute of Medical Sciences, Kunnukara, IND.
Abhilash V GopinathDepartment of Orthopaedics, Sree Narayana Institute of Medical Sciences, Kunnukara, IND.
Goutham B ChandDepartment of Orthopaedics, Thiruvananthapuram Medical College, Thiruvananthapuram, IND.
Varsha ViswambharanDepartment of General Surgery, Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital & Research Centre, Pune, IND.
Abhishek Gowda GbDepartment of Orthopaedics, Jagadguru Jayadeva Murugarajendra (JJM) Medical College, Davanagere, IND.
Chetana RaoDepartment of General Surgery, Dr. D. Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital & Research Centre, Pune, IND.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and long-term outcomes of arthroscopic meniscus repair, focusing on success, failure, and reoperation rates. A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Scopus, including studies that involved patients undergoing arthroscopic meniscus repair with a minimum follow-up of two years. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. Meta-analyses were conducted using RStudio 4.3.1 software (RStudio Inc., Boston, MA), with pooled risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) calculated for dichotomous outcomes using a random effects model. The meta-analysis included 10 studies totaling 1,004 patients. The pooled success rate for arthroscopic meniscus repair was 83% (95% CI: 77%-89%), while the pooled failure rate was 20% (95% CI: 15%-25%), and the pooled reoperation rate was 21% (95% CI: 17%-25%). Significant heterogeneity was observed across studies (I² > 50%). Subgroup analyses based on suture techniques and concurrent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction did not reveal significant outcome differences. Arthroscopic meniscus repair demonstrates high success rates and acceptable failure and reoperation rates, supporting its continued use in clinical practice. However, the variability in study quality and significant heterogeneity highlight the need for more rigorous, high-quality studies to refine techniques and better explore long-term outcomes.

Indexed as

arthroscopic meniscus repairfailure ratelong-term outcomesreoperation ratesuccess ratesystematic review and meta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID39493053
PMCPMC11531707

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.