• 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.