ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2025
Research on the application effect of arthroscopic access modification in meniscal injury repair.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate the application value of arthroscopic channel modification in meniscal injury repair.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the data of 100 patients with meniscus injuries treated with knee arthroscopy from December 2022 to December 2023 and divided them into a control group and a modified group according to the application of "arthroscopic access modification technology". We compared the operation time, postoperative hospitalization time, VAS score, Lysholm knee function score, postoperative complications, and postoperative images of the patients in these two groups. We compared the operation time, postoperative hospitalization time, pre- and postoperative VAS scores, Lysholm knee function scores, postoperative complications and postoperative imaging indices of the patients in the two groups.
resultsAll patients successfully underwent surgery and were followed up without intraoperative vascular or nerve injury or postoperative complications such as infection, wound necrosis or thrombosis. The average follow-up time was 16.03 ± 3.69 months; the average operation time and postoperative hospitalization time of the modified group were significantly better than those of the control group were (P < 0.05); the pain and knee function of the two groups significantly improved over time (P < 0.05); and, compared with those of the control group, the modified group could obtain a more satisfactory score at an early stage of the postoperative period (P < 0.05), and the comparison of the intermediate and long-term scores of the two groups was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference (P > 0.05).
conclusionThe improved arthroscopic access technique can make the entry and exit of instruments into and out of the joint cavity smoother, improve the surgical field of view, significantly shorten the operation time, reduce the occurrence of intraoperative complications, improve the function of patients' knee joints earlier, and increase their satisfaction with the operation.
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.