Purpose: The goal of this study was the clinical evaluation of arthroscopic meniscal repair results with the use of 3 different repair devices.
Methods: From 2001 to 2006, 265 patients underwent 280 meniscal repairs (RapidLoc [DePuy Mitek, Raynham, MA] in 88 patients, T-Fix [Acufex Microsurgical, Mansfield, MA] in 85 patients, and FasT-Fix [Smith & Nephew Endoscopy, Andover, MA] in 92 patients). There were 181 medial and 99 lateral tears; 174 tears were located in Cooper radial zone 1, and 106 tears were in Cooper radial zone 2. All patients had associated anterior cruciate ligament reconstructions. Follow-up assessment included clinical examination, arthrometry (KT-1000; MEDmetric, San Diego, CA), International Knee Documentation Committee scores, and scores on Lysholm functional questionnaires. Clinical criteria for a successful result included the absence of joint line tenderness, swelling, and blocking and the presence of a negative McMurray test.
Results: The mean follow-up was 24.5 months (range, 20 to 26 months). Tear length averaged 3.17 cm (range, 1.4 to 4 cm). A mean of 2.4 suture devices was used. On the basis of our criteria, 28 meniscus repairs were considered to be failures (success rates of 92.4% for FasT-Fix, 87% for T-Fix, and 86.5% for RapidLoc). There were 16 relook arthroscopies for device removal and partial meniscectomy, with 11 patients (68.7%) having failure of the meniscal repair in zone 2. Both the Lysholm and International Knee Documentation Committee scores were significantly improved. Chronicity or location of the tear, length of the tear, and patient age did not affect the clinical outcome.
Conclusions: The compared meniscal repair systems showed comparable clinical results. These meniscal repair systems appeared to be safe and effective, providing a high rate of meniscal healing both in patients with complex tears and in patients with tears located in Cooper radial zone 2.
Level of evidence: Level III, therapeutic retrospective comparative study.