UNASSIGNED: Previous studies have demonstrated that medial meniscus posterior root tear (MMPRT) repair is superior to debridement in terms of patient-reported outcomes, rates of conversion to total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and long-term costs. Despite the known poor midterm outcomes, there is a paucity of long-term results of partial meniscectomy for degenerative MMPRTs.
UNASSIGNED: To 1) evaluate long-term patient-reported and radiographic outcomes of patients who underwent partial medial meniscectomy (PMM) for MMPRTs, and 2) determine the rate of and risk factors for conversion to total knee TKA.
UNASSIGNED: Case series; Level of evidence, 4.
UNASSIGNED: A previously identified cohort of 26 patients treated with partial meniscectomy for isolated MMPRTs between 2005 and 2013 was prospectively followed for long-term outcomes at a minimum 10-year follow-up. Patients were evaluated for International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) outcome score, reoperation, and conversion to TKA. Failure was defined as conversion to arthroplasty or a severely abnormal IKDC subjective score <75.4.
UNASSIGNED: This study included 26 patients (10 men, 16 women; mean age, 54 ± 8.7 years [range, 38-71 years] at diagnosis; body mass index, 32.9 ± 5.5) who were followed for a mean of 14.0 ± 3.6 years (range, 10.1-19.6 years). At the final follow-up, 1 patient was deceased and 18 (72%) of the remaining 25 patients had progressed to TKA, with 1 (4%) patient undergoing repeat meniscectomy. The 6 (24%) patients who had not progressed to TKA or revision surgery reported a mean IKDC score of 57 ± 23. Nineteen patients underwent subsequent surgery and 5 demonstrated severely abnormal IKDC scores resulting in a clinical failure rate of 96% (24 of the 25 living patients) at a mean 14-year follow-up.
UNASSIGNED: PMM for medial meniscus posterior horn root tears demonstrated 72% progression to TKA and 96% failure according to subjective clinical outcomes at a minimum 10-year follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: The importance of meniscus integrity in the prevention of early osteoarthritis is well known, and preservation is accepted as the primary goal. The purpose of the ESSKA (European Society for Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery and Arthroscopy) European consensus on traumatic meniscus tears was to provide recommendations for the treatment of meniscus tears based on both scientific evidence and the clinical experience of knee experts.
METHODS: Three groups of surgeons and scientists elaborated and ratified the so-called formal consensus process to define the recommendations for the management of traumatic meniscus tears. A traumatic meniscus tear was defined as a tear with an acute onset of symptoms caused by a sufficient trauma. The expert groups included a steering group of eight European surgeons and scientists, a rating group of another nineteen European surgeons, and a peer review group. The steering group prepared twenty-seven question and answer sets based on the scientific literature. The quality of the answers received grades of A (a high level of scientific support), B (scientific presumption), C (a low level of scientific support) or D (expert opinion). These question and answer sets were then submitted to and evaluated by the rating group. All answers were scored from 1 (= totally inappropriate) to 9 (= totally appropriate) points. Thereafter, the comments of the members of the rating group were incorporated by the steering group and the consensus was submitted to the rating group a second time. Once a general consensus was reached between the steering and rating groups, the finalized question and answer sets were submitted for final review by the peer review group composed of representatives of the ESSKA-affiliated national societies. Eighteen representatives replied.
RESULTS: The review of the literature revealed a rather low scientific quality of studies examining the treatment of traumatic meniscus tears. Of the 27 questions, only one question received a grade of A (a high level of scientific support), and another received a grade of B (scientific presumption). The remaining questions received grades of C and D. The mean rating of all questions by the rating group was 8.2 (95% confidence interval 8.1-8.4). A general agreement that MRI should be performed on a systematic basis was not achieved. However, MRI was recommended when arthroscopy would be considered to identify concomitant pathologies. In this case, the indication for MRI should be determined by a musculoskeletal specialist. Based on our data, stable left in situ lateral meniscus tears appear to show a better prognosis than medial tears. When repair is required, surgery should be performed as early as possible. Evidence that biological enhancement such as needling or the application of platelet-rich plasma would improve healing was not identified. Preservation of the meniscus should be considered as the first line of treatment because of an inferior clinical and radiological long-term outcome after partial meniscectomy compared to meniscus repair.
CONCLUSIONS: The consensus was generated to present the best possible recommendations for the treatment of traumatic meniscus tears and provides some groundwork for a clinical decision-making process regarding the treatment of meniscus tears. Preservation of the meniscus should be the first line of treatment when possible, because the clinical and radiological long-term outcomes are worse after partial meniscectomy than after meniscus preservation. The consensus clearly states that numerous meniscus tears that were considered irreparable should be repaired, e.g., older tears, tears in obese patients, long tears, etc. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.