ReviewJournal of experimental orthopaedics2025
Meniscal extrusion: Proposal for a novel qualitative classification.
Review in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Meniscal extrusion increases with age: Decade-specific magnetic resonance imaging reference values.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Meniscal extrusion: Multiple theories, one clinical challenge.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Can we Predict the Outcomes of Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy?Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2026Review
- Medial meniscus posterior root tear repair: An overview of surgical techniques and augmentation strategies.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Review
- Standardized Knee Ultrasound Protocol for Dynamic Meniscus Extrusion Evaluation After Meniscus Allograft Transplantation.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
- Meniscal extrusion: Proposal for a novel qualitative classification.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Meniscal extrusion (ME), defined as the radial displacement of the meniscal body outside the margins of the tibial plateau, has been seen as an independent and relevant predictor of intra-articular knee degeneration. Nonetheless, available classifications for ME are exclusively quantitative assessments not considering the context in which extrusion is identified. Indeed, ME can be the result of several different conditions spanning from acute tears to chronic degeneration and its definition cannot be only dependent on the numeric calculation of the radial displacement of the meniscal body. Furthermore, growing evidence supports the existence of a paraphysiological ME resulting from joint loading, limb malalignment, anatomical abnormalities of the meniscal attachments to the femur and tibia or a nonpathological finding after meniscal allograft transplantation. It is therefore clear that an exclusively quantitative assessment of ME cannot be sufficient since this condition can develop in such different clinical scenarios. For this reason, a novel qualitative classification for ME is proposed, differentiating between three distinct conditions: a paraphysiological ME, a pathological ME and ME related to degenerative conditions. Furthermore, a comprehensive review of the present literature has been conducted to report the most relevant and updated evidence on the topic highlighting the difference in the clinical management of each different category. Level of Evidence: Not applicable.
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.