• Journal of the Korean Arthroscopy Society
• /
• v.3 no.1
• /
• pp.24-29
• /
• 1999

Purpose : The purpose of this paper is to analyze the clinical results after meniscal repair using meniscal arrow. Materials and Methods : Between May 1997 and Aug 1998, we repaired 22 tom menisci in 22 patients using meniscal arrows. There were nineteen males and three females with an average age of 27 years. There were longitudinal tear in 14 cases, Bucket-handle tear were 7 cases and horizontal tear was in 1 case. In 22 meniscus tears, 16 cases were associated with anterior cruciate ligament tear. Average number of meniscal arrow that was used were 2.5(ranged 1 to 4). Average follow-up period was 14.7 months(ranged 6 to 22 months). We evaluated the clinical results by the Tapper and Hoover's grading system. Results : There were excellent in 16 cases, good in 4 cases and fair in 2 cases on the clinical results. At the last follow up, the range of the motion of the knee joint were average 135 degrees(ranged 125 to 140 degrees). Mean time elapsed for meniscal repair were 25 minutes(ranged 15 to 40 minutes). Conclusion : Meniscal arrow has many advantages such as short operative time, easy fixation technique, and less neurovascular injury. We think that arthroscopic meniscal repair using meniscal arrow is effective treatment method in selected patient who have longitudinal, bucket-handle tear at the posterior hom associated with anterior cruciate ligament tear.

• Journal of the Korean Arthroscopy Society
• /
• v.4 no.2
• /
• pp.134-137
• /
• 2000

Purpose : To evaluate tile clinical results of resorbable meniscal arrow fixation for repairable meniscal tear with concurrent anterior cruciate ligament(ACL) reconstruction. Materials and Methods : Between April, 1997 and June, 1999, we performed resorbable meniscal arrow fixation and ACL reconstruction simultaneously for 18 cases of repairable meniscal tears with ACL injuries. Nine cases were acute injuries, 5 cases, subacute and 4 cases, chronic. The average follow-up was 21.5 months($12\~38$ months). Results : The healing rate was $89\%$ for acute injuries, $80\%$ for subacute injuries and $50\%$ for chronic injuries. Conclusion : Resorbable meniscal arrow fixation with concurrent ACL reconstruction is a good treatment modality for acute and subacute injuries.

• Journal of the Korean Arthroscopy Society
• /
• v.2 no.2
• /
• pp.181-184
• /
• 1998

This is a report on a aseptic synovitis diagnosed and treated arthroscopically following the meniscal repair using biodegradable Meniscus Arrow$^{(R)}$(Bionix Inc, Malvern, USA). Histological examination revealed chronic nonspecific synovitis and birefringent material. Immunohistochemical tests were positive in lysozyme, ${\alpha}$-1-antitrypsin and ${\alpha}$-1-antichymotrypsin. The patient was received arthroscopic synovectomy, and then pain and swelling of the knee joint was relieved. Range of motion was improved to full range. As far as we know, this is the first case of aseptic synovitis after meniscal repair using biodegradable Meniscus Arrow$^{(R)}$.

• Journal of Korean Orthopaedic Sports Medicine
• /
• v.1 no.2
• /
• pp.124-130
• /
• 2002

Purpose: The results of meniscal repair of peripheral tear of meniscus with meniscal arrow was analysed. Materials and Methods: Peripheral tears of posterior 1/2 of menisci of 25 cases including 18medial, 6 lateral and 1 both menisci were repaired with meniscal arrows. One to six meniscal arrows were used for each meniscus according to the length of tears. Concurrent tears of ACL were noted in14 cases. The follow-up period was 3.4 years in average. The findings of physical examination and MRI which were taken once or twice in 1$\~$5 years after operation were evaluated. Results: Healing of the tear was achieved in all cases. However, a vertical longitudinal tear of body occurred in two medial menisci along the line of insertion of arrows. An arrow migrated subcuta-neously in two cases, respectively. Conclusions: The meniscal arrow was effective in the treatment of the peripheral tear of menicus. However, there was a chance of occurrence of longitudinal tear of the meniscus in case of insertion of arrows in a row. Migration of the arrow may occur.

• Journal of the Korean Arthroscopy Society
• /
• v.6 no.2
• /
• pp.156-160
• /
• 2002

Purpose : To evaluate the results and usefulness of meniscal repair using meniscal arrows with ACL reconstruction. Material and Methods : Among cases of the simultaneous meniscal arrow fixation and ACL recontruction performed between May, 1997 and September, 2000, 17 cases could be evaluated. The average follow-up were 18.5 months. Twelve cases were medial meniscus, 5 cases, lateral meniscus. All cases were longitudinal tear. Meniscal tear were seen at red-red zone in 13 cases, red-white zone in 5 cases. The results were analyzed by pain, joint line tenderness, locking, McMurray test, the Marshall knee scoring scale and complications. Results : Postoperatively two patients had mild joint line tenderness without pain on joint motion or weight bearing. No patient had locking or positive McMurray test. At last follow-up, 15 cases $(88\%)$ were 'excellent' or 'good' according to the Marshall knee score scale. There were two complications which are soft tissue irritation sign on active knee motion and a femoral chondral injury due to protruded T-shaped head of meniscus arrow. Conclusion : Meniscus arrow can be one of the options in repairing the associated meniscus tear, especially the posterior horn of medial meniscus, during ACL reconstruction. However, surgeons using meniscus arrow should be aware of its potential complications such as pain due to soft tissue irritation and chondral damage of the femoral condyle.

• Journal of the Korean Arthroscopy Society
• /
• v.6 no.2
• /
• pp.150-155
• /
• 2002

Purpose : The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical results of meniscal repair using the bioabsorbable devices. Materials and Methods : From 1998, 21 meniscal repairs were underwent using the bioabsorbable devices and followed more than 1 year. The Meniscus $Arrow^{\circledR}$(Bionx) and the Meniscal $Fastener^{\circledR}$(Mitek) had been applied. The indication for meniscus refixation was an unstable longitudinal tear in the posterior horn of the medial or lateral meniscus. Concurrent ACL reconstruction with meniscal repair was performed on 9 knees. The clinical result was evaluated using Lysholm knee score. Result : The average Lysholm knee scores for all patients improved from 56 preoperatively, to 89 postoperatively. The type of the device were not significantly related to clinical outcome or Lysholm knee score. But the concurrent ACL reconstruction group and the patients treated within 8 weeks had better clinical result than the others. Conclusion : The all-inside meniscal repair technique using bioabsorbable devices can be considered to be an useful method in the well selected patients and concurrent ACL reconstruction surgery.

• Journal of the Korean Arthroscopy Society
• /
• v.4 no.1
• /
• pp.19-24
• /
• 2000

Purpose : To clinically analyze 62 patients who had meniscal repair and compare the results according to methods of repair. Materials and Methods : Between May 1997 and June 1998, we repaired 68 torn menisci in 68 patients. There were 52 male and 10 female with an average age of 26.9 years(ranging from 6 to 51 years). We used Linvatec suture in 46 knees(group A)and meniscal arrow in 16 knees(B group). In six knees we used Linvatec and meniscal arrow both. These 6 knees were excluded and 62 of 68 repaired meniscus were analyzed in this study. Average follow-up period was 18.5 months(ranging 12 to 26 months). We evaluated clinical results by Tapper and Hoover's grading system and subjective symptoms of the patients. Results : There were excellent in 47 cases$(76\%)$, good in 12$(19\%)$ and fair in 3$(5\%)$. In group A, there were excellent in 35 cases$(76\%)$, good in 9$(20\%)$ and fair in 2$(4\%)$. In group B, there were excellent in 12 cases$(75\%)$, good in 3$(19\%)$ and fair in 1$(6\%)$. There was no significant differences in clinical results between two groups. But mean operative time taken for meniscus repair was 40 minutes in group A and 25 minutes in group B. Conclusion : We can obtain good clinical results with short operation time in meniscal repair by proper selection of methods of repair according to the type, location, and size of meniscal tear and associated lesions.