Advanced search
1 file | 283.01 KB

Revision of meniscal transplants: long-term clinical follow-up

Author
Organization
Abstract
Purpose: The primary aim is to document objective and subjective clinical outcome after knee arthroplasty for failed meniscal allograft transplantation; secondly, to investigate the influence of previous meniscal allograft surgery on the clinical outcome after a knee arthroplasty procedure; thirdly, to identify possible prognostic factors for the failure of meniscal allograft, such as potential number of concomitant procedures or pre-transplantation HSS-scores. The study population was compared to a control group of primary total knee arthroplasties. Methods: The pre-operative phase, prior to meniscal allograft transplantation, was evaluated by the HSS questionnaire. At final follow-up, the clinical outcome was evaluated by the HSS, KOOS and SF-36 questionnaires. The mean follow-up was 16 years and 2 months. The control group, matched for age and sex, comprised patients with primary total knee arthroplasty. Results: Statistical analysis showed that for the HSSscores, there was no significant difference between the study population and the control group. KOOS data showed that the control group scored better overall. There was no significant difference between the HSS-scores after the transplantation and after the knee prosthesis. However, both showed a significant improvement regarding the clinical condition before meniscal transplantation. Conclusions: The clinical results after revised meniscal transplantation by means of knee prosthesis are highly variable with a tendency to have a lower score than patients with a primary knee prosthesis. Patients who underwent a revision of their meniscal allograft transplantation by means of a knee arthroplasty still had a significant better clinical outcome than prior to the meniscal allograft transplantation. There were no prognostic factors found by which one can determine whether a meniscal allograft will have a good survival or not.
Keywords
Meniscal allograft transplantation, Revision, Knee arthroplasty, ALLOGRAFT TRANSPLANTATION, Prognostic factors, TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY

Downloads

    • full text
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 283.01 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

Chicago
Verbruggen, Dimitri, Thomas Verschueren, Thomas Tampere, Karl Almqvist, Jan Victor, René Verdonk, and Peter Verdonk. 2014. “Revision of Meniscal Transplants: Long-term Clinical Follow-up.” Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy 22 (2): 351–356.
APA
Verbruggen, Dimitri, Verschueren, T., Tampere, T., Almqvist, K., Victor, J., Verdonk, R., & Verdonk, P. (2014). Revision of meniscal transplants: long-term clinical follow-up. KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 22(2), 351–356.
Vancouver
1.
Verbruggen D, Verschueren T, Tampere T, Almqvist K, Victor J, Verdonk R, et al. Revision of meniscal transplants: long-term clinical follow-up. KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY. 2014;22(2):351–6.
MLA
Verbruggen, Dimitri, Thomas Verschueren, Thomas Tampere, et al. “Revision of Meniscal Transplants: Long-term Clinical Follow-up.” KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY 22.2 (2014): 351–356. Print.
@article{4181668,
  abstract     = {Purpose: The primary aim is to document objective and subjective clinical outcome after knee arthroplasty for failed meniscal allograft transplantation; secondly, to investigate the influence of previous meniscal allograft surgery on the clinical outcome after a knee arthroplasty procedure; thirdly, to identify possible prognostic factors for the failure of meniscal allograft, such as potential number of concomitant procedures or pre-transplantation HSS-scores. The study population was compared to a control group of primary total knee arthroplasties.
Methods: The pre-operative phase, prior to meniscal allograft transplantation, was evaluated by the HSS questionnaire. At final follow-up, the clinical outcome was evaluated by the HSS, KOOS and SF-36 questionnaires. The mean follow-up was 16 years and 2 months. The control group, matched for age and sex, comprised patients with primary total knee arthroplasty.
Results: Statistical analysis showed that for the HSSscores, there was no significant difference between the study population and the control group. KOOS data showed that the control group scored better overall. There was no significant difference between the HSS-scores after the transplantation and after the knee prosthesis. However, both showed a significant improvement regarding the clinical condition before meniscal transplantation.
Conclusions: The clinical results after revised meniscal transplantation by means of knee prosthesis are highly variable with a tendency to have a lower score than patients with a primary knee prosthesis. Patients who underwent a revision of their meniscal allograft transplantation by means of a knee arthroplasty still had a significant better clinical outcome than prior to the meniscal allograft transplantation. There were no prognostic factors found by which one can determine whether a meniscal allograft will have a good survival or not.},
  author       = {Verbruggen, Dimitri and Verschueren, Thomas and Tampere, Thomas and Almqvist, Karl and Victor, Jan and Verdonk, Ren{\'e} and Verdonk, Peter},
  issn         = {0942-2056},
  journal      = {KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY},
  keyword      = {Meniscal allograft transplantation,Revision,Knee arthroplasty,ALLOGRAFT TRANSPLANTATION,Prognostic factors,TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {2},
  pages        = {351--356},
  title        = {Revision of meniscal transplants: long-term clinical follow-up},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-013-2439-6},
  volume       = {22},
  year         = {2014},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: