Purpose: Meniscal tears are common and may impair knee function and biomechanics. This meta‐analysis compared meniscal repair versus resection in patients with symptomatic meniscal tears in terms of patient‐reported outcomes measures (PROMs), joint width, surgical failure, and rate of progression to osteoarthritis (OA) at conventional radiography.Methods: This study was conducted according to the 2020 PRISMA statement. In August 2023, the following databases were accessed: PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Embase. Two reviewers independently performed the analysis and a methodological quality assessment of the included studies. All the clinical investigations which compared repair versus resection of meniscal tears were accessed.Results: Data from 20 studies (31,783 patients) were collected. The mean BMI was 28.28 ± 3.2 kg/m², and the mean age was 37.6 ± 14.0 years. The mean time elapsed from injury to surgery was 12.1 ± 10.2 months and the mean medial joint width was 4.9 ± 0.8 mm. Between studies comparability at baseline was found in age, women, BMI, time from injury to surgery and length of the follow‐up, PROMs, medial joint width, and stage of OA. The resection group demonstrated a greater Lysholm score (P = 0.02). No difference was found in the International Knee Documentation Committee (P = 0.2). Nine studies reported data on the rate of failures at a mean of 63.00 ± 24.7 months. No difference was found between the two groups in terms of persistent meniscal symptoms (P = 0.8). Six studies reported data on the rate of progression to total knee arthroplasty at a mean of 48.0 ± 14.7 months follow‐up. The repair group evidenced a lower rate of progression to knee arthroplasty (P = 0.0001). Six studies reported data on the rate of advanced knee OA at a mean of 48.0 ± 14.7 months of follow‐up. The repair group evidenced a lower rate of advanced knee OA (P = 0.0001). No difference was found in the mean joint space width (P = 0.09).Conclusion: Meniscal repair is associated with a lower progression to knee osteoarthritis at approximately six years of follow‐up compared to partial meniscectomy. No difference in PROMs, medial joint width, and failures were evidenced.Level of evidence: Level III, meta‐analysis.

Autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis (AMIC) has been advocated for the management of talar osteochondral lesions (OCLs). This systematic review, which was conducted according to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, investigated the clinical and imaging efficacy and safety of the AMIC technique in the management of OCLs of the talus. Only studies investigating AMIC for talar chondral defects that were published in peer-reviewed journals were considered. In September 2022, the following databases were accessed: PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Embase. Data on the visual analogue scale (VAS), American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Score (AOFAS), Tegner activity scale, and Foot Function Index (FFI) were retrieved. To evaluate the morphological MRI findings, data obtained from the magnetic resonance observation of cartilage repair tissue (MOCART) scores were evaluated. Data on hypertrophy, failures, and revision surgeries were also collected. Data from 778 patients (39% women, 61% men) were collected. The mean length of the follow-up was 37.4 ± 16.1 months. The mean age of the patients was 36.4 ± 5.1 years, and the mean BMI was 26.1 ± 1.6 kg/m². The mean defect size was 2.1 ± 1.9 cm². Following the AMIC technique, patients demonstrated an improved VAS (p < 0.001), AOFAS (p < 0.001), and FFI (p = 0.02) score. The MOCART score also improved from the baseline (p = 0.03). No difference was observed in the Tegner score (p = 0.08). No graft delamination and hypertrophy were reported in 353 patients. 7.8% (44 of 564) of patients required revision surgeries, and 6.2% (32 of 515) of patients were considered failures. The AMIC technique could be effective in improving symptoms and the function of chondral defects of the talus.