ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2026
Surgical Outcomes of Revision Meniscal Repair: A Case Series.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 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
Background: Revision meniscal repair may yield better postoperative outcomes than meniscectomy. Few studies concerning the postoperative results of revision meniscal repair are available. Purpose: To evaluate the clinical outcomes following revision meniscal repair for meniscal retears after isolated meniscal repair. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: The cases of 11 knees with ≥1 year of postoperative follow-up were retrospectively analyzed after they had undergone revision as a result of retear at the initial suture site between 2018 and 2024. We compared the patients' presurgical and final follow-up values on the Tegner sports activity score (Tegner score), Lysholm score, and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Form by Wilcoxon signed-rank test. At 1 year postoperatively, the revision site was structurally evaluated by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). To account for multiple comparisons across outcome measures, a Bonferroni correction was applied, with statistical significance set at a Results: Of the 11 knees, 7 were male and 4 were female (median age at revision: 23 years; IQR, 17-32 years). The median Lysholm and IKDC scores both improved significantly from 57.0 (IQR, 40.0-81.0) and 50.8 (IQR, 37.9-72.4) before revision surgery to 91.0 (IQR, 90.0-100.0) and 88.5 (74.7-94.3) at the final follow-up ( Conclusion: Our study showed that revision meniscal repair may improve short-term clinical results in carefully selected patients with retears. Further research is required to define optimal indications and 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.