ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Percutaneous inside-out meniscal repair without a posterior safety incision: clinical outcomes and safety profile.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMeniscal repair has increasingly replaced meniscectomy because of its superior long-term clinical outcomes and protective effects against osteoarthritis. The inside-out technique is widely considered the gold standard due to its strong biomechanical fixation and versatility. However, the conventional technique requires a posteromedial or posterolateral safety incision to protect neurovascular structures, which increases surgical invasiveness and technical complexity. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and MRI outcomes of a percutaneous modification of the inside-out technique that eliminates the need for a formal posterior safety incision.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 61 patients who underwent isolated meniscal repair using the percutaneous inside-out technique between January 2022 and January 2023 with a minimum follow-up of 24 months. Clinical and radiological outcomes were evaluated using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) and Lysholm scores, McMurray testing, and neurological examination.
resultsPostoperative MRI demonstrated complete healing in 62.3% and partial healing in 9.8% of patients, yielding an overall healing rate of 72.1%. Functional success was achieved in 90.2% of patients according to IKDC scores and 88.5% according to Lysholm scores, with a combined success rate of 77.0%. Neurological complications occurred in 9.8% of patients and were not associated with the stab incision site. Higher Lysholm scores, non-smoking status, left-sided surgery, longitudinal or horizontal tear patterns, and a negative postoperative McMurray test were identified as independent predictors of MRI healing. Conversely, higher IKDC scores showed an inverse association with MRI healing grades. ROC analysis demonstrated that the Lysholm score had good discriminative ability for detecting neurological deficits (AUC = 0.767; cut-off = 91; sensitivity = 83.3%, specificity = 69.1%).
conclusionThe percutaneous inside-out technique demonstrated favorable clinical and MRI outcomes while avoiding the need for a formal posterior safety incision. This approach may represent a reliable and minimally invasive alternative to conventional inside-out meniscal repair techniques.
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.