Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40453023›Full record

ArticleArthroscopy techniques2025

Revision Anterior Horn Medial Meniscus Root Repair.

Bergin M Brown, Evan P Shoemaker, Luke V Tollefson, Nathan J Jacobson, Robert F LaPrade

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Arthroscopy techniques, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. A Review of Revision Meniscal Repair: Clinical Considerations and Outcomes.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2025
    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

5 authors.

Bergin M BrownTwin Cities Orthopedics, Edina, Minnesota, U.S.A.
Evan P ShoemakerTwin Cities Orthopedics, Edina, Minnesota, U.S.A.
Luke V TollefsonTwin Cities Orthopedics, Edina, Minnesota, U.S.A.
Nathan J JacobsonTwin Cities Orthopedics, Edina, Minnesota, U.S.A.
Robert F LaPradeTwin Cities Orthopedics, Edina, Minnesota, U.S.A.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Meniscus root tears, while less common than tears of the meniscal body, are considered among the most serious meniscal lesions because of their effect on knee kinematics. Posterior tears of the meniscal root attachments are the most prevalent root tear pattern. Anterior meniscal root tears are less common and present unique challenges with visualization and instrument navigation for viable cortical fixation. Treatment options for meniscal root tears include nonoperative treatment, partial meniscectomy, or meniscus root repair. Repair is becoming more popular over partial meniscectomy; however, root repair techniques have a failure rate of about 20%. This technique describes an arthroscopic-assisted revision anterior horn medial meniscus root repair for failure of a previous repair. This revision technique involves a mini-arthrotomy to improve visualization of the medial meniscus anterior root attachment and to allow for a more secure repair. Outcomes and failure rates of revision meniscus root repair are comparable to primary repair, and revision should be performed to restore function and prevent medial compartment osteochondral degeneration.

Identifiers

PMID40453023
PMCPMC12125996

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.