Ghent University Academic Bibliography

Advanced

Arthroscopic meniscus repair: inside-out technique vs. Biofix meniscus arrow

Franky Steenbrugge UGent, René Verdonk UGent, C Hurel and Koenraad Verstraete UGent (2004) KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY. 12(1). p.43-49
abstract
A retrospective study evaluated meniscal suturing using an inside-out technique vs. an all-inside technique (Biofix meniscus Arrow). Fifty-five knees in 55 patients who underwent closed meniscus repair between 1985 and 1995 were divided in two groups: 20 managed by an inside-out technique; and 35 managed by an all-inside technique. All patients underwent the same postoperative program of partial weight bearing, immediate motion, and rehabilitation of the knee. They were subjected to a clinical examination using Hospital for Special Surgery knee rating system. The mean follow-up was 13 years, 2 months (11 years, 11 months-15 years, 4 months) in the inside-out group and 6 years, 5 months (6 years-6 years 10 months) in the Biofix Arrow group. Sixteen patients also had an anterior cruciate ligament injury, of which six were repaired at the time of meniscus repair and one 6 years after meniscal repair. Thirty-nine patients had an excellent or good result (87% satisfactory outcome), three had a fair result, and three had a poor result. Meniscal suturing thus provides good clinical long-term results. The advantages of an all-inside technique include short operating time, superfluous capsular exposure, easier technique, and potentially lower risk of neurovascular lesions, especially when posterior horns are involved.
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
year
type
journalArticle (original)
publication status
published
subject
keyword
inside-out technique, meniscal suture, arthroscopy, meniscus arrow, anterior cruciate ligament, HORIZONTAL SUTURE, FAILURE STRENGTH, AVASCULAR ZONE, TEARS
journal title
KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY
Knee Surg. Sports Traumatol. Arthrosc.
volume
12
issue
1
pages
43 - 49
Web of Science type
Article
Web of Science id
000188495800008
JCR category
ORTHOPEDICS
JCR impact factor
1.182 (2004)
JCR rank
13/42 (2004)
JCR quartile
2 (2004)
ISSN
0942-2056
DOI
10.1007/s00167-003-0446-8
language
English
UGent publication?
yes
classification
A1
copyright statement
I have transferred the copyright for this publication to the publisher
id
288794
handle
http://hdl.handle.net/1854/LU-288794
date created
2004-05-28 16:39:00
date last changed
2014-10-29 14:39:23
@article{288794,
  abstract     = {A retrospective study evaluated meniscal suturing using an inside-out technique vs. an all-inside technique (Biofix meniscus Arrow). Fifty-five knees in 55 patients who underwent closed meniscus repair between 1985 and 1995 were divided in two groups: 20 managed by an inside-out technique; and 35 managed by an all-inside technique. All patients underwent the same postoperative program of partial weight bearing, immediate motion, and rehabilitation of the knee. They were subjected to a clinical examination using Hospital for Special Surgery knee rating system. The mean follow-up was 13 years, 2 months (11 years, 11 months-15 years, 4 months) in the inside-out group and 6 years, 5 months (6 years-6 years 10 months) in the Biofix Arrow group. Sixteen patients also had an anterior cruciate ligament injury, of which six were repaired at the time of meniscus repair and one 6 years after meniscal repair. Thirty-nine patients had an excellent or good result (87\% satisfactory outcome), three had a fair result, and three had a poor result. Meniscal suturing thus provides good clinical long-term results. The advantages of an all-inside technique include short operating time, superfluous capsular exposure, easier technique, and potentially lower risk of neurovascular lesions, especially when posterior horns are involved.},
  author       = {Steenbrugge, Franky and Verdonk, Ren{\'e} and Hurel, C and Verstraete, Koenraad},
  issn         = {0942-2056},
  journal      = {KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY},
  keyword      = {inside-out technique,meniscal suture,arthroscopy,meniscus arrow,anterior cruciate ligament,HORIZONTAL SUTURE,FAILURE STRENGTH,AVASCULAR ZONE,TEARS},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {1},
  pages        = {43--49},
  title        = {Arthroscopic meniscus repair: inside-out technique vs. Biofix meniscus arrow},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-003-0446-8},
  volume       = {12},
  year         = {2004},
}

Chicago
Steenbrugge, Franky, René Verdonk, C Hurel, and Koenraad Verstraete. 2004. “Arthroscopic Meniscus Repair: Inside-out Technique Vs. Biofix Meniscus Arrow.” Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy 12 (1): 43–49.
APA
Steenbrugge, Franky, Verdonk, R., Hurel, C., & Verstraete, K. (2004). Arthroscopic meniscus repair: inside-out technique vs. Biofix meniscus arrow. KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 12(1), 43–49.
Vancouver
1.
Steenbrugge F, Verdonk R, Hurel C, Verstraete K. Arthroscopic meniscus repair: inside-out technique vs. Biofix meniscus arrow. KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY. 2004;12(1):43–9.
MLA
Steenbrugge, Franky, René Verdonk, C Hurel, et al. “Arthroscopic Meniscus Repair: Inside-out Technique Vs. Biofix Meniscus Arrow.” KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY 12.1 (2004): 43–49. Print.