ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2025
Current Rehabilitation Principles Following Meniscus Repairs.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Physiotherapeutic care of patients with rupture of the anterior cruciate ligament or meniscus lesion in Germany.Research in health services & regions · 2026Article
- Postoperative Weight-Bearing, Range-of-Motion Protocols and Knee Biomechanics After Concomitant Posterolateral Meniscal Root Repair with ACL Reconstruction: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Meniscus extrusion after a medial meniscus root repair: Where we are and how can we solve it?Science progressReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewThe purpose of this review is to synthesize current science on meniscus anatomy and biomechanics and repair techniques to create an empirical foundation for postoperative rehabilitation precautions and guidelines, including timelines, clinical and performance-based criteria for return to activity, to maximize both meniscal healing potential and patient recovery. RECENT
findingsRecent literature has focused on meniscus repair rather than debridement, and rehabilitation protocols should be designed to optimize healing. Complex, unstable tears, like root and radial tears, disrupt hoop stress and warrant a more conservative protocol including 6 weeks of non-weightbearing; however, more stable tears, like ramp and vertical tears, can often weight bear immediately after surgery. All protocols should emphasize early protected joint motion. Return to activity guidelines remain ill-defined but this review explores evidence-based recommendations for timelines, strength and performance testing. Patients typically should wait ≥ 4 months for a return to activity and the presence of joint line tenderness or effusion could be a sign of delayed/failed healing. It is essential for therapists to know the size, type, and location of a meniscus repair to optimize patient outcomes. Guidelines for weight bearing, range of motion, strength training, and return to activity should vary per tear type and repair technique and recovery should be both time- and criteria-based. Return to activity should align with healing time, objective clinical and performance testing, and clinical and imaging exam findings. Future research should aim to optimize repair techniques and rehabilitation protocols, specifically further study on the timing to initiate weightbearing, early motion, and return to activity.
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.