Knee Surg Relat Res.
2017 Mar;29(1):3-10. 10.5792/ksrr.16.059.
Meniscal Transplants and Scaffolds: A Systematic Review of the Literature
- Affiliations
-
- 1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA.
- 2Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Magna Græcia University, Catanzaro, Italy. filippofamiliari@gmail.com
- 3Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, C.O.T. Cure Ortopediche Traumatologiche, Messina, Italy.
- 4Department of Orthopaedic and Traumatology, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey.
- KMID: 2371527
- DOI: http://doi.org/10.5792/ksrr.16.059
Abstract
- The reported incidence of meniscal tears is approximately 61 per 100,000. In instances where preservation of the native meniscus is no longer a feasible option, meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT) and implants or scaffolds may be considered. The goal of this review was to compare the success and failure rates of two techniques, MAT and meniscal scaffolds, and make an inference which treatment is more preferable at the present time and future. Studies that met inclusion criteria were assessed for technique used, type of transplant used, number of procedures included in the study, mean age of patients, mean follow-up time, number of failures, failure rate, and reported reoperation rate. Fifteen studies for the MAT group and 7 studies for the meniscal scaffold group were identified. In this selection of studies, the average failure rate in the MAT group was 18.7% and average reoperation rate was 31.3%. The average failure rate in the meniscal scaffold group was 5.6%, and average reoperation rate was 6.9%. It appears that although MAT is associated with high reoperation and failure rates, the limited number of studies on both MAT and scaffolds and mainly short-term results of scaffold studies make it difficult to make an objective comparison.
