OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the present study was to perform a survey administered to members of the Meniscus International Network (MenIN) Study Group, seeking to delineate the most contentious aspects of meniscal extrusion classification and provide a foundation for new, more comprehensive definitions and treatments for these pathologies.
METHODS: MenIN Study Group is a group of international experts treating and performing research on meniscus pathology and treatment. All MenIN Study Group members were asked to complete a survey aimed at establishing criteria for the optimal classification system for meniscal extrusion. Data obtained from the completed questionnaires were transferred into a spreadsheet and then analysed. All responses are presented as counts, percentages or means.
RESULTS: Forty-seven (85.5%) MenIN Study Group members completed the survey and were included in this analysis. Key aspects recommended for inclusion in a comprehensive classification system for meniscal extrusion included laterality (93.6%), anatomical location (76.6%), patient age (76.6%), body mass index (BMI) (68.1%) and aetiology (68.1%). For classifying meniscal extrusion, 53.2% considered the distance in millimetres from the tibial plateau\'s outer margin as the most reliable measurement technique on imaging. Preferences for imaging modalities varied, with 44.7% favouring weight-bearing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and 36.2% opting for weight-bearing ultrasound due to its greater availability. Respondents advocated for a classification system addressing stability or progression of meniscal extrusion (66%), reducibility (53.2%), potential progression of knee osteoarthritis (OA) (83%), influencing treatment approaches (83%), a gradation system (83%), consideration of dynamic factors (66%), association with clinical outcomes and prognosis (76.6%) and investigation around centralization procedures (57.4%).
CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the findings of this survey shed light on the global perspectives regarding meniscal extrusion classification. It was generally felt that a new classification of extrusion measured on MRI scans at the mid-tibial plateau should be developed, which considers factors such as laterality, anatomical location, age, BMI and aetiology. Additionally, the results support the integration of dynamic factors and clinical outcomes in MRI-based classifications to inform treatment approaches.
METHODS: Level IV.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the ESSKA 2022 consensus Part III was to develop patient-focused, contemporary, evidence-based, guidelines on the indications for revision anterior cruciate ligament surgery (ACLRev).
METHODS: The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method (RAM) was used to provide recommendations on the appropriateness of surgical treatment versus conservative treatment in different clinical scenarios based on current scientific evidence in conjunction with expert opinion. A core panel defined the clinical scenarios with a moderator and then guided a panel of 17 voting experts through the RAM tasks. Through a two-step voting process, the panel established a consensus as to the appropriateness of ACLRev for each scenario based on a nine-point Likert scale (in which a score in the range 1-3 was considered \'inappropriate\', 4-6 \'uncertain\', and 7-9 \'appropriate\').
RESULTS: The criteria used to define the scenarios were: age (18-35 years vs 36-50 years vs 51-60 years), sports activity and expectation (Tegner 0-3 vs 4-6 vs 7-10), instability symptoms (yes vs no), meniscus status (functional vs repairable vs non-functional meniscus), and osteoarthritis (OA) (Kellgren-Lawrence [KL] grade 0-I-II vs grade III). Based on these variables, a set of 108 clinical scenarios was developed. ACLRev was considered appropriate in 58%, inappropriate in 12% (meaning conservative treatment is indicated), and uncertain in 30%. Experts considered ACLRev appropriate for patients with instability symptoms, aged ≤ 50 years, regardless of sports activity level, meniscus status, and OA grade. Results were much more controversial in patients without instability symptoms, while higher inappropriateness was related to scenarios with older age (51-60 years), low sporting expectation, non-functional meniscus, and knee OA (KL III).
CONCLUSIONS: This expert consensus establishes guidelines as to the appropriateness of ACLRev based on defined criteria and provides a useful reference for clinical practice in determining treatment indications.
METHODS: II.

Discoid lateral meniscus (DLM) is the most common congenital variant of the lateral meniscus, which is prone to degeneration and lesions, and often leads to knee osteoarthritis. At present, there is no consensus on the clinical practice of DLM, and this expert consensus and practice guidelines on DLM was developed and approved by Chinese Society of Sports Medicine according to the Delphi method. Among 32 statements drafted, 14 statements were excluded for redundant information, and 18 statements achieved consensus. This expert consensus focused on the definition, epidemiology, etiology, classification, clinical manifestations, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis, and rehabilitation of DLM. Restoring the normal shape, retaining appropriate width and thickness, and ensuring the stability of the remnant meniscus is critical to sustaining the physiological function of the meniscus and preserving the knee. The partial meniscectomy with or without repair should be the first-line treatment when possible, given that the clinical and radiological long-term outcomes of total or subtotal meniscectomy are worse.

OBJECTIVE: To identify and quantify potential risk factors for osteoarthritis (OA) following traumatic knee injury.
METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analyses that estimated the odds of OA for individual risk factors assessed in more than four studies using random-effects models. Remaining risk factors underwent semiquantitative synthesis. The modified GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach for prognostic factors guided the assessment.
METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL searched from inception to 2009-2021.
UNASSIGNED: Randomised controlled trials and cohort studies assessing risk factors for symptomatic or structural OA in persons with a traumatic knee injury, mean injury age ≤30 years and minimum 2-year follow-up.
RESULTS: Across 66 included studies, 81 unique potential risk factors were identified. High risk of bias due to attrition or confounding was present in 64% and 49% of studies, respectively. Ten risk factors for structural OA underwent meta-analysis (sex, rehabilitation for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear, ACL reconstruction (ACLR), ACLR age, ACLR body mass index, ACLR graft source, ACLR graft augmentation, ACLR+cartilage injury, ACLR+partial meniscectomy, ACLR+total medial meniscectomy). Very-low certainty evidence suggests increased odds of structural OA related to ACLR+cartilage injury (OR=2.31; 95% CI 1.35 to 3.94), ACLR+partial meniscectomy (OR=1.87; 1.45 to 2.42) and ACLR+total medial meniscectomy (OR=3.14; 2.20 to 4.48). Semiquantitative syntheses identified moderate-certainty evidence that cruciate ligament, collateral ligament, meniscal, chondral, patellar/tibiofemoral dislocation, fracture and multistructure injuries increase the odds of symptomatic OA.
CONCLUSIONS: Moderate-certainty evidence suggests that various single and multistructure knee injuries (beyond ACL tears) increase the odds of symptomatic OA. Risk factor heterogeneity, high risk of bias, and inconsistency in risk factors and OA definition make identifying treatment targets for preventing post-traumatic knee OA challenging.

The goal of the OPTIKNEE consensus is to improve knee and overall health, to prevent osteoarthritis (OA) after a traumatic knee injury. The consensus followed a seven-step hybrid process. Expert groups conducted 7 systematic reviews to synthesise the current evidence and inform recommendations on the burden of knee injuries; risk factors for post-traumatic knee OA; rehabilitation to prevent post-traumatic knee OA; and patient-reported outcomes, muscle function and functional performance tests to monitor people at risk of post-traumatic knee OA. Draft consensus definitions, and clinical and research recommendations were generated, iteratively refined, and discussed at 6, tri-weekly, 2-hour videoconferencing meetings. After each meeting, items were finalised before the expert group (n=36) rated the level of appropriateness for each using a 9-point Likert scale, and recorded dissenting viewpoints through an anonymous online survey. Seven definitions, and 8 clinical recommendations (who to target, what to target and when, rehabilitation approach and interventions, what outcomes to monitor and how) and 6 research recommendations (research priorities, study design considerations, what outcomes to monitor and how) were voted on. All definitions and recommendations were rated appropriate (median appropriateness scores of 7-9) except for two subcomponents of one clinical recommendation, which were rated uncertain (median appropriateness score of 4.5-5.5). Varying levels of evidence supported each recommendation. Clinicians, patients, researchers and other stakeholders may use the definitions and recommendations to advocate for, guide, develop, test and implement person-centred evidence-based rehabilitation programmes following traumatic knee injury, and facilitate data synthesis to reduce the burden of knee post-traumatic knee OA.

OBJECTIVE: Critically appraise and summarise the measurement properties of knee muscle strength tests after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and/or meniscus injury using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments Risk of Bias checklist.
METHODS: Systematic review with meta-analyses. The modified Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation-guided assessment of evidence quality.
METHODS: Medline, Embase, CINAHL and SPORTSDiscus searched from inception to 5 May 2022.
METHODS: Studies evaluating knee extensor or flexor strength test reliability, measurement error, validity, responsiveness or interpretability in individuals with ACL and/or meniscus injuries with a mean injury age of ≤30 years.
RESULTS: Thirty-six studies were included involving 31 different muscle strength tests (mode and equipment) in individuals following an ACL injury and/or an isolated meniscus injury. Strength tests were assessed for reliability (n=8), measurement error (n=7), construct validity (n=27) and criterion validity (n=7). Isokinetic concentric extensor and flexor strength tests were the best rated with sufficient intrarater reliability (very low evidence quality) and construct validity (moderate evidence quality). Isotonic extensor and flexor strength tests showed sufficient criterion validity, while isometric extensor strength tests had insufficient construct and criterion validity (high evidence quality).
CONCLUSIONS: Knee extensor and flexor strength tests of individuals with ACL and/or meniscus injury lack evidence supporting their measurement properties. There is an urgent need for high-quality studies on these measurement properties. Until then, isokinetic concentric strength tests are most recommended, with isotonic strength tests a good alternative.

OBJECTIVE: We synthesised and assessed credibility (ie, trustworthiness) of thresholds that define meaningful scores for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following interventions for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) tear or traumatic meniscus injury.
METHODS: Systematic review, narrative synthesis.
METHODS: We searched five databases, handsearched references of included studies and tracked citations.
UNASSIGNED: Included studies investigated: individuals with ACL tear or meniscus injury; mean age <35 years; and PROM thresholds calculated using any method to define a minimal important change (MIC) or a meaningful post-treatment score (Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) or Treatment Failure).
RESULTS: We included 18 studies (15 ACL, 3 meniscus). Three different methods were used to calculate anchor-based MICs across 9 PROMs, PASS thresholds across 4 PROMs and treatment failure for 1 PROM. Credibility was rated \'high\' for only one study-an MIC of 18 for the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Quality-of-life (KOOS-QOL) subscale (using the MID Credibility Assessment Tool). Where multiple thresholds were calculated among \'low\' credibility thresholds in ACL studies, MICs converged to within a 10-point range for KOOS-Symptoms (-1.2 to 5.4) and function in daily living (activities of daily living, ADL 0.5-8.1) subscales, and the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (7.1-16.2). Other PROM thresholds differed up to 30 points. PASS thresholds converged to within a 10-point range in KOOS-ADL for ACL tears (92.3-100), and KOOS-Symptoms (73-78) and KOOS-QOL (53-57) in meniscus injuries.
CONCLUSIONS: Meaningful PROM thresholds were highly susceptible to study heterogeneity. While PROM thresholds can aid interpretability in research and clinical practice, they should be cautiously interpreted.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。