PDF herunterladen
J Knee Surg
DOI: 10.1055/a-2640-3369
Original Article

Partial Meniscectomy or Physical Therapy in Degenerative Meniscus Tears: A Retrospective Cohort Study with 2-Year Follow-Up

Authors

  • Yusuf Altuntas 

    1   Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Istanbul Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

  • Ismail Tuter 

    2   Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Sehit Prof Dr Ilhan Varank Sancaktepe Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

  • Raffi Armagan 

    1   Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Istanbul Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

  • Rodi Ertogrul 

    3   Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, İstanbul Medipol University Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey

  • Muharrem Kanar 

    1   Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Istanbul Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

  • Güngör Alibakan 

    1   Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Istanbul Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

  • Osman T. Eren

    1   Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Istanbul Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

Funding None.
Weitere Informationen
   Lizenzen und Reprints
Preview

Abstract

Degenerative meniscal injuries are a common occurrence in orthopedic practice. However, there is currently no consensus regarding the optimal treatment algorithm and the efficacy of different treatment modalities. Therefore, this study aimed to analyze the clinical reflections of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) and physical therapy (PT) methods, as well as the potential development of osteoarthritis (OA) following treatment. The study group comprised patients diagnosed with degenerative meniscal tears who were treated with either conservative or APM methods at a center between March 2021 and January 2022. The radiographs of these patients prior to the commencement of treatment were classified according to the Kelgren–Lawrence system, and clinical and pain scores were recorded. Following a 2-year period of treatment, the radiographs and scores at the conclusion of the third, 12th, and 24th months were analyzed. Among 213 patients followed up with a diagnosis of degenerative meniscal damage, at the 3-month follow-up, the APM group demonstrated significantly better pain relief and functional outcomes compared with the PT group, with notable improvements in WOMAC (between score difference: −15.96; 95% confidence interval [CI]: −17.08 to −14.83), Lysholm (23.43; 95% CI: 22.15–24.71), and VAS (−6.98; 95% CI: −7.25 to −6.71) scores (p < 0.001). However, by the 12th and 24th months, both groups showed comparable long-term improvements. Radiographic assessments over 2 years revealed no significant differences in OA progression. These findings suggest that APM provides superior short-term benefits, but both APM and PT are equally effective in the long-term management of degenerative meniscus tears. A comparison of the APM and PT groups revealed that patients under 50 years of age who underwent APM demonstrated superior outcomes in terms of pain and functional scores at the 3-month follow-up. At the 2-year mark, the efficacy of the treatment methods was established, yet no significant differences were observed in their capacity to prevent OA.

The level of evidence is III.

Keywords

degenerative meniscus tear - arthroscopic partial meniscectomy - osteoarthritis - gonarthrosis - sports medicine

Note

This article is based on Yusuf Altuntas's thesis entitled “Dejeneratif menisküs yırtıklarında parsiyel menisektomi yapılmış olan hastalar ile konservatif tedavi uygulanmış olan hastaların osteoartrit seyrinin klinik ve radyolojik olarak karşılaştırılması” in 2024 year. Thesis Approval E-48865165–302.14.01–149744.


Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all patients involved in this study.


Ethical Approval

Approval for the study was granted by the Health Sciences University Sisli Hamidiye Etfal Health Practice and Research Center Clinical Research Ethics Committee (decision number: 2162, date: December 13, 2022).


Authors' Contributions

Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by Y.A. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Y.A., and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. O.T.E. substantial contributions to the acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data for the work; revising it critically for important intellectual content; final approval of the version to be published; agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. All authors contributed to the study conception and read and approved the final manuscript. Substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work; acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of data for the work; drafting of the manuscript and revising it critically for important intellectual content; final approval of the version to be published; agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved were made by Y.A., R.A., R.E., M.K., I.T., G.A., and O.T.E.




Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 05. Januar 2025

Angenommen: 19. Juni 2025

Accepted Manuscript online:
20. Juni 2025

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
03. Juli 2025

© 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA