Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40083750›Full record

ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2025

Outcomes After Isolated Medial Meniscus Posterior Root Repairs Using an Anatomic Transtibial Pullout Technique in Patients Older Than 60 Years: A Matched Cohort Study.

Garrett R Jackson, Derrick M Knapik, Zeeshan A Khan, Harkirat Jawanda, Obianuju A Obioha, Daniel J Kaplan, Johnathon R McCormick, Joan Sugrañes, Anjay Batra, Enzo S Mameri and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

12 authors.

Garrett R JacksonDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7018-8382
Derrick M KnapikDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Washington University and Barnes-Jewish Orthopedic Center, Chesterfield, Missouri, USA.
Zeeshan A KhanRush Medical College, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Harkirat JawandaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Obianuju A ObiohaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Daniel J KaplanDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Johnathon R McCormickDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Joan SugrañesDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6209-1639
Anjay BatraDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Enzo S MameriDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Nikhil N VermaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Jorge ChahlaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Management of isolated medial meniscus posterior root (MMPR) tears is challenging, especially in older patients, where indications for repair must be weighed against potential repair failure and osteoarthritic progression. Purpose: To compare patient-reported outcomes and incidence of failure after anatomic transtibial pullout repair for isolated MMPR tears in patients >60 versus ≤60 years of age. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Included in the study were patients aged ≥18 years who underwent isolated anatomic transtibial pullout repair using either the single- or double-tunnel technique for MMPR tears at a single institution between January 2016 and September 2020. Patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up were divided based on age at surgery (>60 vs ≤60 years). Patients completed the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (KOOS JR), and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12) Physical score preoperatively and at final follow-up. Differences between age groups in outcome scores as well as repair failures (defined as the need for repeat arthroscopy) were analyzed using the 2-sided Student Results: A total of 20 patients aged >60 years (mean age, 65.7 ± 4.1 years; range, 60.2-74.9 years) were identified and compared against 40 patients aged ≤60 years (mean age, 49.3 ± 9.0 years; range, 23.4-59.8 years). Significant improvement on all outcomes scores was observed in both groups at final follow-up when compared with preoperative values, with no significant between-group difference on any of the scores at final follow-up. Revision repair was required in 1 patient (2.5%) in the ≤60-year group but not in patients in the >60-year group. Conclusion: Anatomic transtibial pullout repair for isolated MMPR tears resulted in improved IKDC, KOOS JR, and VR-12 Physical scores at minimum 2-year follow-up, with no significant differences between our cohorts of patients >60 versus ≤60 years of age.

Indexed as

chronologic agedebridementmedial meniscusoutcomesposterior rootrepair

Identifiers

PMID40083750
PMCPMC11905030

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.