Krych, Aaron J

Background Isolated meniscal tears in the skeletally immature patient are infrequent but well-recognized injuries. Although few studies have evaluated the pediatric and adolescent population, arthroscopic surgical repair remains the standard of care for Patients in this age group with unstable meniscal tears. Purpose To review our results of arthroscopic repair of isolated meniscal tears in pediatric and adolescent patients to further define future management of these injuries. Study Design Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods The records of all patients 18 years old or younger who underwent isolated meniscal repair between 1990 and 2005 were retrospectively reviewed. Forty-four patients (6 girls, 38 boys) with an average age of 15.8 years (range, 9.9-18.7 years) were included in this study, for a total of 45 isolated meniscal tears. Clinical examinations were performed, International Knee Documentation Committee forms were administered, and Tegner scores were determined at an average of 5.8 years (range, 2.5 months-13.8 years) postoperative follow-up. Three patients were lost to follow-up. Results The clinical success rate of arthroscopic meniscal repair was 80% for simple tears, 68% for displaced bucket-handle tears, and 13% for complex tears. Seventeen menisci (38% overall) failed initial repair at a mean of 17 months (range, 3-61 Months) postoperatively and underwent repeat arthroscopic surgery (15 partial meniscectomies, 2 rerepair). The average Tegner and International Knee Documentation Committee scores were 8 (range, 5-9) and 89.4 (range, 79-99), respectively, at the time of final follow-up. Risk factors for failure included complex tears and rim width greater than 3 mm. Conclusion Clinically successful repair of an isolated meniscal tear in patients 18 years or younger was variable depending on tear type, with complex tears and rim width 3 mm or greater being negative prognostic factors.

Purpose Studies have suggested good long‐term success rates with bone–patellar tendon–bone (BPTB) autograft and BPTB allograft in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, but the numbers reported in available prospective studies may be underpowered to elucidate significant differences between the two groups. Here, we present a meta‐analysis to compare the results of BPTB autograft and BPTB allograft in primary ACL reconstruction. Methods A systematic review of prospective trials using BPTB autograft and BPTB allograft tissue for ACL reconstruction with a minimum 2‐year follow‐up was performed. Summary odds ratios (ORs), confidence intervals, and P values were calculated. Results Of 548 studies, 6 fulfilled our inclusion criteria, with 256 patients in the autograft and 278 patients in the allograft group. Allograft patients were more likely to rupture their graft than autograft patients (OR, 5.03; P = .01) and more likely to have a hop test less than 90% of the nonoperative side (OR, 5.66; P < .01). When irradiated and chemically processed grafts were excluded from analysis, no significant differences were found between allograft and autograft patients with respect to graft rupture, rate of reoperation, normal/near normal IKDC scores, Lachman exam, pivot shift exam, patellar crepitus, hop test, or return to sport. Conclusions In this meta‐analysis, ACL reconstruction with BPTB autograft was favored over BPTB allograft for graft rupture and hop test parameters. However, when irradiated and chemically processed grafts were excluded, results were not significantly different between the two graft types. Level of Evidence Level III, systematic review of prospective nonrandomized cohort studies.