ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2024
Arthroscopic meniscal surgery in Norway from 2010 to 2020: A paradigmatic shift.
Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical outcomes of meniscal repair using bone marrow aspirate-derived fibrin clot: A comparison of tears with and without meniscal cysts.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
- An Acta Orthopaedica educational article: Current strategies for meniscal preservation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.Acta orthopaedica · 2026Review
- Increased reoperation rates after meniscus repair compared to arthroscopic partial meniscectomy: Data from a comprehensive clinical cohort with up to 10 years follow-up.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Article
- The 'Save the Meniscus' philosophy and the 'Iceberg' concept.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Arthroscopic meniscal surgery in Norway from 2010 to 2020: A paradigmatic shift.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2024Article
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
Purpose: Meniscal injuries in the knee are usually treated surgically with arthroscopic partial resection (APR) or arthroscopic repair (AR). APR has been shown to increase the risk of osteoarthritis and the focus has shifted to repairing the meniscus with AR. The extent of this shift is yet to be established and an analysis of incidence rates (IR) of APR and AR for meniscal injuries could highlight this. Methods: Data from the Norwegian Patient Registry (NPR) and Statistics Norway (SN) from 2010 to 2020 were collected. The number of procedures, demographics and facilities providing meniscal surgery were obtained from NPR, while population size and catchment area were collected from SN. IR of APR and AR and APR/AR rate ratios were estimated and compared. Results: A total of 119,528 knee arthroscopies were performed, 89.6% of which were APR. The number of APR performed nationally decreased by 72%, while AR procedures increased by 178%. The national IR of APR decreased from 298 to 82/100,000 inhabitants ( Conclusion: Surgical treatment of meniscal injuries has changed, with a substantial reduction in APR and a strong increase in AR. The reduction in APR, especially in older patients, suggests that meniscal surgery in Norway has undergone a paradigmatic shift, in line with recent literature. Level of Evidence: Level IV.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.