• Journal of Korean Orthopaedic Sports Medicine
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.19-25
• /
• 2009

Purpose: We report mid to long - term results of meniscal transplantation and evaluate the important factors for successful outcomes. Materials and Methods: Between December 1999 and September 2002, 25 meniscal transplantations were performed using fresh frozen allograft. The lateral meniscus was transplanted in 19 cases and medial meniscus in 6 cases. The mean age was 34 years (range, 17~50 years) and the mean follow up was 54.8 months (range, 6~85 months). Preoperative measurements were made using a ruler graded in millimeters. Lateral meniscus was fixed by keyhole technique and medial meniscus was fixed by double bone plug technique with suturing the periphery of the meniscal transplant. All patients were evaluated with Knee Assessment Scoring System (KASS), Lysholm knee score, and Tegner activity scale for daily activity. Results: Symptoms improved in all cases. The average KASS score increased from 61.7 preoperatively to 83.8 postoperatively. The average Lysholm knee score increased from 77.7 preoperatively to 87.7 postoperatively (excellent in 3 cases, good in 17 cases, fair 4 cases, poor 1 case). But painful swellings were 3 cases, numbness in 1 case, and granuloma due to non-absorbable suture material in 1 case. Peroneal nerve palsy in 1 case was recovered after 6 weeks postoperatively. Conclusion: Meniscal allograft transplantation after subtotal or total menisectomy can significantly relieve pain and improve function of the knee joint. The exact preoperative sizing and secure fixation are essential for successful outcomes.

• Journal of the Korean Arthroscopy Society
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.36-41
• /
• 2011

Treatment options are limited for young, meniscal-deficient patients with pain. This patient population is not age appropriate for total joint replacement, but the loss of the meniscus leaves them at significant risk for the development of osteoarthritis. One increasingly popular option is the use of allograft meniscal transplantation. However, many questions still surround allograft meniscus transplantation. Furthermore, most reports in the literature on the results of meniscal transplantation describe small case series using clinical outcome measures and/or incomplete direct evaluation of the meniscus. Therefore, the results of meniscal allograft transplantation have been difficult to interpret and compare due to many confounding variables. In this study, we reviewed the current research of concerns on the results of meniscal allograft transplantation.

• Journal of the Korean Arthroscopy Society
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.42-49
• /
• 2011

Recently, meniscal allograft transplantation has been regarded as a successful procedure in terms of pain relief and functional improvement for the symptomatic patients previously underwent subtotal or total meniscectomy. However, the likelihood of a successful outcome would be reduced by various complications including graft tear, shrinkage, extrusion, infection, progressive chondral injury, and granuloma due to nonabsorbable suture material. Therefore, knee surgeons need to be all aware of the complications and to make an effort to minimize them. The purpose of this article is to review the current literatures regarding clinical results and complications after meniscus allograft transplantation.

• Journal of the Korean Arthroscopy Society
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.32-35
• /
• 2011

Meniscal allograft transplantation is considered to restore important functions of the meniscus after total and subtotal meniscectomy. There are patients who need meniscal allograft transplantation have concomitant lesions; chronic anterior cruciate ligament tear, chondral defect, and malalignment of the knee. Therefore proper selection of the patients and thorough preparation of operative procedure are imperative to get satisfactory results.

• Journal of Korean Orthopaedic Sports Medicine
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.47-53
• /
• 2011

Purpose: As the number of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction has increased, the incidence of revision of ACL reconstruction due to reconstruction failure has been also increased. Therefore, authors analyzed the reason of the failure of ACL reconstruction and the clinical result of the ACL revision. Materials and methods: From February 1998 to July 2010, we selected 36 cases which was followed at least 12months after the ACL reconstruction failure. Duration from reconstruction to revision, the average duration was 60 months (5~334) and on first reconstruction, we used allograft on 23 cases (63.9%) and autograft on 13 cases (36.1%). For the main symptom of ACL reconstruction failure, instability was the most common symptom, and 35 cases (97.5%) were undergone only one reconstruction and 1case (2.5%) was undergone two reconstruction. Clinical results were evaluated by Lysholm knee joint score, pivot shift test, and Telos device. Results: Average follow-up duration of the patients was 21 months (12~40), and the reason for the ACL reconstruction failure, trauma was most common by 19 cases (52.8%), malposition of the femoral tunnel was 13 cases (36.1%), malposition of the tibia tunnel was 1case (2.8%), and failure of osteointegration was 3 cases (8.4%). On performing the ACL revision, we used allograft on 34 cases (94%) and autograft on 2 cases (6%), and 21 cases accompanied injury of the meniscus (medial meniscus 14 cases, lateral meniscus 7 cases). Lysholm knee joint score was improved from 66.5 points, preoperatively to 92 points on last follow-up (p<0.01). In most cases, patients were satisfied (92%) with the operation results. Tegner activity score was also improved from 2.0 points preoperatively to 6.2 points on the last follow-up. On Lachman and pivot sift test, 33 cases and 30 cases were improved to grade I respectively, and on stability test using Telos device, the bilateral difference was improved from mean 15.5 mm preoperatively to 4.5 mm on the last follow-up. Conclusion: After 1 year follow-up, Revision of ACL had a little anterior instability but it showed satisfactory result on clinical result and patient's subjective satisfaction.