ArticleMedicine2026
Meniscal repair versus resection: Integrating pain mediator profiles with functional outcomes in a comparative effectiveness study.
Article in Medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Double Posterior Cruciate Ligament Sign.Reports (MDPI) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Arthroscopic meniscal surgery remains controversial regarding optimal tissue management strategies. While partial meniscectomy provides immediate symptom relief, concerns persist about accelerated joint degeneration. Meniscal repair preserves tissue but requires technical expertise and prolonged rehabilitation. This study aims to comprehensively compare mid-term outcomes between arthroscopic meniscal repair and partial meniscectomy through multidimensional assessment of biochemical, functional, biomechanical, and structural parameters. Arthroscopic meniscal repair demonstrates superior mid-term efficacy compared to partial meniscectomy across all assessed domains. The comprehensive benefits reduced inflammatory burden, enhanced functional recovery, improved biomechanics, and better structural outcomes strongly support tissue preservation strategies. This retrospective comparative study analyzed 108 patients with meniscal injuries (October 2022-October 2024) who underwent either arthroscopic repair (n = 56) or partial meniscectomy (n = 52). Outcomes assessed at 6-month follow-up included serum pain mediators (5-HT, prostaglandin E2, bradykinin) via enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, functional status using Oxford knee score and Lysholm scale, gait parameters through instrumented analysis, and clinical/magnetic resonance imaging evaluation. Statistical analysis employed Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables and chi-square tests for categorical variables, with Wilcoxon signed-rank test for paired comparisons (P < .05). Both groups showed comparable baseline characteristics. At 6-month follow-up, the repair group demonstrated significantly lower pain mediator concentrations compared to resection: 5-HT (438.67, interquartile range [IQR] 398.52-485.43 vs 516.51, IQR 465.38-572.84 μg/L, P < .001), prostaglandin E2 (152.79, IQR 131.45-175.38 vs 206.46, IQR 182.74-235.67 pg/mL, P < .001), and bradykinin (8.43, IQR 6.82-10.15 vs 12.51, IQR 9.45-15.83 ng/mL, P < .001). Functional scores favored repair with superior Oxford knee score (14.24, IQR 11.95-16.82 vs 16.32, IQR 13.58-19.24, P = .002) and Lysholm scores (80.39, IQR 74.52-86.94 vs 69.38, IQR 63.48-75.82, P < .001). Effect sizes ranged from 0.65 to 0.92, indicating large clinical differences. Clinical examination positivity rates were markedly lower after repair, with magnetic resonance imaging abnormalities persisting in 17.86% versus 36.54% (P = .029).
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.