Failure of isolated primary meniscal repair must be expected in approximately 10–25% of cases. Patients requiring revision surgery may benefit from revision meniscal repair, however, the results of this procedure remain underreported. The purpose of this study was therefore to evaluate the outcome and failure rates of isolated revision meniscal repair in patients with re-tears or failed healing after previous meniscal repair in stable knee joints. A chart review was performed to identify all patients undergoing revision meniscal repair between 08/2010 and 02/2016. Only patients without concomitant procedures, without ligamentous insufficiency, and a minimum follow-up of 24 months were included. The records of all patients were reviewed to collect patient demographics, injury patterns of the meniscus, and details about primary and revision surgery. Follow-up evaluation included failure rates, clinical outcome scores (Lysholm Score, KOOS Score), sporting activity (Tegner scale), and patient satisfaction. A total of 12 patients with a mean age of 22 ± 5 years were included. The mean time between primary repair and revision repair was 27 ± 21 months. Reasons for failed primary repairs were traumatic re-tears in 10 patients (83%) and failed healing in two patients (17%). The mean follow-up period after revision meniscal repair was 43 (± 23.4) months. Failure of revision meniscal repair occurred in 3 patients (25%). In two of these patients, successful re-revision repair was performed. At final follow-up, the mean Lysholm Score was 95.2 (± 4.2) with a range of 90–100, representing a good to excellent result in all patients. The final assessment of the KOOS subscores also showed good to excellent results. The mean Tegner scale was 6.8 ± 1.8, indicating a relatively high level of sports participation. Ten patients (83%) were either satisfied or very satisfied with the outcome. In patients with re-tears or failed healing after previous isolated meniscal repair, revision meniscal repair results in good to excellent knee function, high level of sports participation, and high patient satisfaction. The failure rate is slightly higher compared to isolated primary meniscal repair, but still acceptable. Therefore, revision meniscal repair is worthwhile in selected cases in order to save as much meniscal tissue as possible.

Purpose: Approximately 60% of patients undergoing arthroscopy of the knee present with chondral defects. If left untreated, osteochondral lesions can trigger an early onset of osteoarthritis. Many cartilage repair techniques are mainly differentiated in techniques aiming for bone marrow stimulation, or cell-based methods. Cartilage repair can also be categorized in one- and two-stage procedures. Some two-stage procedures come with a high cost for scaffolds, extensive cell-processing, strict regulatory requirements, and limited logistical availability. Minced cartilage, however, is a one-stage procedure delivering promising results in short term follow-up, as noted in recent investigations. However, there is no available literature summarizing or synthesizing clinical data. The purpose of this study was to analyze and synthesize data from the latest literature in a meta-analysis of outcomes after the minced cartilage procedure and to compare its effectiveness to standard repair techniques. Methods: We conducted a systematic review searching the Cochrane, PubMed, and Ovid databases. Inclusion criteria were the modified Coleman methodology Score (mCMS) >60, cartilaginous knee-joint defects, and adult patients. Patient age < 18 years, biomechanical and animal studies were excluded. Relevant articles were reviewed independently by referring to title and In a systematic review, we compared three studies and 52 patients with a total of 63 lesions. Results: Analysis of Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) sub scores at 12 and 24 months showed a significant score increase in every sub score. Highest mean difference was seen in KOOS sport, lowest in KOOS symptoms (12 month: KOOS sport (Mean difference: 35.35 [28.16, 42.53]; p < 0.0001), lowest in KOOS symptoms (Mean difference: 20.12 [15.43, 24.80]; p < 0.0001)). A comparison of International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC ) scores visualized a significant score increase for both time points too ((12 month: pooled total mean: 73.00 ± 14.65; Mean difference: 34.33 [26.84, 41.82]; p < 0.00001) (24 month: pooled total mean: 77.64 ± 14.46; mean difference: 35.20 [39.49, 40.92]; p < 0.00001)). Conclusion: Due to no need for separate cell-processing, and thanks to being a one-step procedure, minced cartilage is a promising method for cartilage repair in small defect sizes (mean 2.77 cm², range 1.3–4.7 cm²). However, the most recent evidence is scarce, and takes only results two years post-surgery into account. Summarized, minced cartilage presents nearly equal short-term improvement of clinical scores (IKDC, KOOS) compared to standard cartilage repair techniques.

Purpose: Trochlear dysplasia is a significant risk factor for patellofemoral instability. The severity of trochlear dysplasia is commonly evaluated based on the Dejour classification in axial MRI slices. However, this often leads to heterogeneous assessments. A software to generate MRI‐based 3D models of the knee was developed to ensure more standardized visualization of knee structures. The purpose of this study was to assess the intra‐ and interobserver agreements of 2D axial MRI slices and an MRI‐based 3D software generated model in classification of trochlear dysplasia as described by Dejour.Methods: Four investigators independently assessed 38 axial MRI scans for trochlear dysplasia. Analysis was made according to Dejour’s 4 grade classification as well as differentiating between 2 grades: low‐grade (types A + B) and high‐grade trochlear dysplasia (types C + D). Assessments were repeated following a one‐week interval. The inter‐ and intraobserver agreement was determined using Cohen’s kappa (κ) and Fleiss kappa statistic (κ). In addition, the proportion of observed agreement (po) was calculated for assessment of intraobserver agreement.Results: The assessment of the intraobserver reliability with regard to the Dejour‐classification showed moderate agreement values both in the 2D (κ = 0.59 ± 0.08 SD) and in the 3D analysis (κ = 0.57 ± 0.08 SD). Considering the 2‐grade classification, the 2D (κ = 0.62 ± 0.12 SD) and 3D analysis (κ = 0.61 ± 0.19 SD) each showed good intraobserver matches. The analysis of the interobserver reliability also showed moderate agreement values with differences in the subgroups (2D vs. 3D). The 2D evaluation showed correspondences of κ = 0.48 (Dejour) and κ = 0.46 (high / low). In the assessment based on the 3D models, correspondence values of κ = 0.53 (Dejour) and κ = 0.59 (high / low) were documented.Conclusion: Overall, moderate‐to‐good agreement values were found in all groups. The analysis of the intraobserver reliability showed no relevant differences between 2 and 3D representation, but better agreement values were found in the 2‐degree classification. In the analysis of interobserver reliability, better agreement values were found in the 3D compared to the 2D representation. The clinical relevance of this study lies in the superiority of the 3D representation in the assessment of trochlear dysplasia, which is relevant for future analytical procedures as well as surgical planning.Level of evidence: Level II.

Purpose: The menisci transmit load between femur and tibia and thus play a crucial role in the functionality of the knee joint. Knee joint movements have a major impact on the position of the menisci. However, these meniscus movements have not yet been assessed in a validated setting. The objective of this study is to evaluate the meniscal movements in MRI with prospective motion correction based on optical tracking under loading via internal and external tibial torques.Methods: Thirty‐one healthy volunteers were recruited for this study. MRI scans were performed in internal and external rotation induced by a torque of 5 Nm, using a 3 T MRI. A validated software used the generated images to calculate the absolute meniscus movements as the sum of all vectors. Differences between subgroups were analyzed by using a Wilcoxon signed‐rank test.Results: The MM shows an average movement of 1.79 mm in anterior‐lateral direction under internal rotation and 6.01 mm in posterior‐lateral direction under external rotation, whereas the LM moves an average of 4.55 mm in posterior‐medial direction under internal rotation and 3.58 mm in anterior‐medial direction under external rotation. When comparing the overall meniscus movements between internal and external rotation, statistically significant differences were found for total vector length and the direction of meniscus movements for medial and lateral meniscus. The comparison between medial and lateral meniscus movements also showed statistically significant differences in all categories for internal and external rotation.Conclusions: Overall, the MM and LM movements in internal and external rotation differ significantly in extent and direction, although MM and LM movements in opposite directions during internal and external rotation can be observed. In internal rotation, most meniscus movements were found in the IHLM. In external rotation, the IHMM showed the greatest mobility. Segment analysis of internal vs. external rotation showed less difference in LM movements than MM.Level of evidence: Level II.

Background: Patellofemoral instability (PFI) leads to chronic knee pain, reduced performance and chondromalacia patellae with consecutive osteoarthritis. Therefore, determining the exact patellofemoral contact mechanism, as well as the factors leading to PFI, is of great importance. The present study compares in vivo patellofemoral kinematic parameters and the contact mechanism of volunteers with healthy knees and patients with low flexion patellofemoral instability (PFI). The study was performed with a high-resolution dynamic MRI. Material/Methods: In a prospective cohort study, the patellar shift, patella rotation and the patellofemoral cartilage contact areas (CCA) of 17 patients with low flexion PFI were analyzed and compared with 17 healthy volunteers, matched via the TEA distance and sex, in unloaded and loaded conditions. MRI scans were carried out for 0°, 15° and 30° knee flexion in a custom-designed knee loading device. To suppress motion artifacts, motion correction was performed using a moiré phase tracking system with a tracking marker attached to the patella. The patellofemoral kinematic parameters and the CCA was calculated on the basis of semi-automated cartilage and bone segmentation and registrations. Results: Patients with low flexion PFI showed a significant reduction in patellofemoral CCA for 0° (unloaded: p = 0.002, loaded: p = 0.004), 15° (unloaded: p = 0.014, loaded: p = 0.001) and 30° (unloaded: p = 0.008; loaded: p = 0.001) flexion compared to healthy subjects. Additionally, patients with PFI revealed a significantly increased patellar shift when compared to volunteers with healthy knees at 0° (unloaded: p = 0.033; loaded: p = 0.031), 15° (unloaded: p = 0.025; loaded: p = 0.014) and 30° flexion (unloaded: p = 0.030; loaded: p = 0.034) There were no significant differences for patella rotation between patients with PFI and the volunteers, except when, under load at 0° flexion, PFI patients showed increased patellar rotation (p = 0.005. The influence of quadriceps activation on the patellofemoral CCA is reduced in patients with low flexion PFI. Conclusion: Patients with PFI showed different patellofemoral kinematics at low flexion angles in both unloaded and loaded conditions compared to volunteers with healthy knees. Increased patellar shifts and decreased patellofemoral CCAs were observed in low flexion angles. The influence of the quadriceps muscle is diminished in patients with low flexion PFI. Therefore, the goal of patellofemoral stabilizing therapy should be to restore a physiologic contact mechanism and improve patellofemoral congruity for low flexion angles.