ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2025
Long-Term Results for Meniscus Repair.
Review in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Combined Posteromedial Loop Stitch and All-Inside Anterior Suture Technique for Medial Meniscus Ramp Lesion Repair.Arthroscopy techniques · 2026Article
- Meniscus Pathology in the Setting of Revision ACL Surgery: Unique Considerations.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2026Review
- Rethinking meniscal repair in patients over 40: Extending the boundaries of joint preservation.World journal of methodology · 2026Review
- Complications and Reoperations Following Meniscal Repair and Transplantation.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- Comparative Outcomes of Arthroscopic Versus Open Meniscus Repair: An Observational Study.Journal of orthopaedic case reports · 2026Article
- Osteoarthritis: multitissue pathology, molecular mechanisms, clinical management, and emerging precision and regenerative therapies.Frontiers in pharmacology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewMeniscus tears are some of the most commonly managed orthopedic injuries that affect a wide variety of patient populations. Traditionally, meniscus tears were treated either conservatively or with partial meniscectomy. However, recent technological innovations have generated a rapid evolution in the modern evaluation and treatment of meniscus tears. The primary objective of this review is to provide a detailed overview of long-term results of meniscus repair after greater than five to ten years follow up, highlighting modern surgical techniques, clinical and radiologic outcomes, rates of failure and revision surgery, as well as emerging insights and future directions. RECENT
findingsAdvancements in arthroscopic implants and techniques helped establish meniscus repair as the preferred approach for treating many meniscal tears due to its ability to preserve native knee kinematics and decrease the risk of osteoarthritic progression. In properly indicated patients, long-term clinical data supports performing meniscus repair over traditional treatments, such as partial meniscectomy, to preserve overall knee function and longevity. The impact of tear morphology on healing rates, potential for biologic augmentation, and optimal postoperative rehabilitation are substantial areas of active research. Undertaking a comprehensive, individualized approach evaluating careful patient selection, sound surgical technique, and ideal rehabilitation strategies is critical to guiding treatment decisions and achieving long-term successful outcomes.
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.