Dataset Information

Early Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Changes in Patients With Meniscal Tear and Osteoarthritis: Eighteen-Month Data From a Randomized Controlled Trial of Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy Versus Physical Therapy.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

The present study was undertaken to evaluate changes in knee magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings over the course of 18 months in subjects with osteoarthritic change and meniscal tear treated with arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) or nonoperatively with physical therapy (PT).

Methods

We used 18-month follow-up data from the Meniscal Tear in Osteoarthritis Research Trial. MRI results were read with reference to the MRI Osteoarthritis Knee Score. We focused on 18-month change in bone marrow lesions (BMLs), cartilage thickness, cartilage surface area, osteophyte size, effusion-synovitis, and Hoffa-synovitis. We used multinomial logistic regression to assess associations between MRI-based changes in each feature and treatment type.

Results

A total of 351 subjects were randomized, and 225 had both baseline and 18-month MRI results. In both treatment groups, patients experienced substantial changes in several MRI-based markers. In 60% of the APM group, versus 33% of the PT group, cartilage surface area damage advanced in ≥2 subregions (adjusted odds ratio 4.2 [95% confidence interval 2.0-9.0). Patients who underwent APM also had greater advancement in scores for osteophytes and effusion-synovitis. We did not find significant associations between treatment type and change in cartilage thickness, BMLs, or Hoffa-synovitis.

Conclusion

This cohort of patients with meniscal tear and osteoarthritis showed marked advancement in MRI-based features over 18 months. Patients treated with APM showed more advancement in some features compared to those treated nonoperatively. The clinical relevance of these early findings is unknown and requires further study.

SUBMITTER: Collins JE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6773533 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveWe examined the cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies for concomitant meniscal tear and knee osteoarthritis (OA) involving arthroscopic partial meniscectomy surgery and physical therapy (PT).MethodsWe used the Osteoarthritis Policy Model, a validated Monte Carlo microsimulation, to compare three strategies, 1) PT-only, 2) immediate surgery, and 3) PT + optional surgery, for participants whose pain persists following initial PT. We modeled a cohort with baseline meniscal tear, OA, and demographics from the Meniscal Tear in Osteoarthritis Research (MeTeOR) trial of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy versus PT. We estimated risks and costs of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy complications and accounted for heightened OA progression post surgery using published data. We estimated surgery use rates and treatment efficacies using MeTeOR data. We considered a 5-year time horizon, discounted costs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) 3% per year and conducted sensitivity analyses. We report incremental cost-effectiveness ratios.ResultsRelative to PT-only, PT + optional surgery added 0.0651 QALY and $2,010 over 5 years (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio = $30,900 per QALY). Relative to PT + optional surgery, immediate surgery added 0.0065 QALY and $3080 (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio = $473,800 per QALY). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were sensitive to optional surgery efficacy in the PT + optional surgery strategy. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, PT + optional surgery was cost-effective in 51% of simulations at willingness-to-pay thresholds of both $50,000 per QALY and $100,000 per QALY.ConclusionFirst-line arthroscopic partial meniscectomy has a prohibitively high incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Under base case assumptions, second-line arthroscopic partial meniscectomy offered to participants with persistent pain following initial PT is cost-effective at willingness-to-pay thresholds between $31,000 and $473,000 per QALY. Our analyses suggest that arthroscopic partial meniscectomy can be a high-value treatment option for patients with meniscal tear and OA when performed following an initial PT course and should remain a covered treatment option.

Project description:Objective To determine if exercise therapy is superior to arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for knee function in middle aged patients with degenerative meniscal tears.Design Randomised controlled superiority trial.Setting Orthopaedic departments at two public hospitals and two physiotherapy clinics in Norway.Participants 140 adults, mean age 49.5 years (range 35.7-59.9), with degenerative medial meniscal tear verified by magnetic resonance imaging. 96% had no definitive radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis.Interventions 12 week supervised exercise therapy alone or arthroscopic partial meniscectomy alone.Main outcome measures Intention to treat analysis of between group difference in change in knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS4), defined a priori as the mean score for four of five KOOS subscale scores (pain, other symptoms, function in sport and recreation, and knee related quality of life) from baseline to two year follow-up and change in thigh muscle strength from baseline to three months.Results No clinically relevant difference was found between the two groups in change in KOOS4 at two years (0.9 points, 95% confidence interval -4.3 to 6.1; P=0.72). At three months, muscle strength had improved in the exercise group (P≤0.004). No serious adverse events occurred in either group during the two year follow-up. 19% of the participants allocated to exercise therapy crossed over to surgery during the two year follow-up, with no additional benefit.Conclusion The observed difference in treatment effect was minute after two years of follow-up, and the trial's inferential uncertainty was sufficiently small to exclude clinically relevant differences. Exercise therapy showed positive effects over surgery in improving thigh muscle strength, at least in the short term. Our results should encourage clinicians and middle aged patients with degenerative meniscal tear and no definitive radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis to consider supervised exercise therapy as a treatment option.Trial registration www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01002794).

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine if exercise therapy is superior to arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for knee function in middle aged patients with degenerative meniscal tears.DesignRandomised controlled superiority trial.SettingOrthopaedic departments at two public hospitals and two physiotherapy clinics in Norway.Participants140 adults, mean age 49.5 years (range 35.7-59.9), with degenerative medial meniscal tear verified by magnetic resonance imaging. 96% had no definitive radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis.Interventions12 week supervised exercise therapy alone or arthroscopic partial meniscectomy alone.Main outcome measuresIntention to treat analysis of between group difference in change in knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS4), defined a priori as the mean score for four of five KOOS subscale scores (pain, other symptoms, function in sport and recreation, and knee related quality of life) from baseline to two year follow-up and change in thigh muscle strength from baseline to three months.ResultsNo clinically relevant difference was found between the two groups in change in KOOS4 at two years (0.9 points, 95% confidence interval -4.3 to 6.1; P=0.72). At three months, muscle strength had improved in the exercise group (P≤0.004). No serious adverse events occurred in either group during the two year follow-up. 19% of the participants allocated to exercise therapy crossed over to surgery during the two year follow-up, with no additional benefit.ConclusionThe observed difference in treatment effect was minute after two years of follow-up, and the trial's inferential uncertainty was sufficiently small to exclude clinically relevant differences. Exercise therapy showed positive effects over surgery in improving thigh muscle strength, at least in the short term. Our results should encourage clinicians and middle aged patients with degenerative meniscal tear and no definitive radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis to consider supervised exercise therapy as a treatment option.Trial registrationwww.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01002794).

Project description:Objectives To compare patient reported outcomes from before surgery to 52 weeks after surgery between individuals undergoing arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for traumatic meniscal tears and those for degenerative meniscal tears.Design Comparative prospective cohort study.Setting Four public orthopaedic departments in the Region of Southern Denmark. Participants were recruited between 1 February 2013 and 31 January 2014, and at one of the original four hospitals from 1 February 2014 to 31 January 2015.Participants Individuals selected from Knee Arthroscopy Cohort Southern Denmark, aged 18-55, and undergoing arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for a traumatic or degenerative meniscal tear (defined by a combination of age and symptom onset).Interventions Both participant groups underwent arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for a meniscal tear, with operating surgeons recording relevant information on knee pathology. Patient reported outcomes were recorded via online questionnaires.Main outcome measures Primary outcome was the average between-group difference in change on four of five subscales of the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS). The four subscales covered pain, symptoms, sport and recreational function, and quality of life (KOOS4). A 95% confidence interval excluding differences greater than 10 KOOS points between groups was interpreted as absence of a clinically meaningful difference. Analyses adjusted for age, sex, and body mass index.Results 397 eligible adults (42% women) with a traumatic or degenerative meniscal tear (n=141, mean age 38.7 years (standard deviation 10.9); n=256, 46.6 years (6.4); respectively) were included in the main analysis. At 52 weeks after arthroscopic partial meniscectomy, 55 (14%) patients were lost to follow-up. Statistically, participants with degenerative meniscal tears had a significantly larger improvement in KOOS4 scores than those with traumatic tears (adjusted between-group difference -5.1 (95% confidence interval -8.9 to -1.3); P=0.008). In the analysis including KOOS4 score at all time points, a significant time-by-group interaction was observed in both the unadjusted (P=0.025) and adjusted analysis (P=0.024), indicating better self-reported outcomes in participants with degenerative tears. However, the difference between groups was at no time point considered clinically meaningful.Conclusions These results question the current tenet that patients with traumatic meniscal tears experience greater improvements in patient reported outcomes after arthroscopic partial meniscectomy than patients with degenerative tears.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01871272.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Compare arthroscopic partial meniscectomy to a true sham intervention. METHODS:Sham-controlled superiority trial performed in three county hospitals in Denmark comparing arthroscopic partial meniscectomy to skin incisions only in patients aged 35-55 years with persistent knee pain and an MRI-confirmed medial meniscus lesion. A computer-generated table of random numbers generated two comparison groups. Participants and outcome assessors were blinded to group allocation. Exclusions were locking knees, high-energy trauma or severe osteoarthritis. Outcomes were collected at baseline, 3 and 24 months. We hypothesised no difference between groups. The primary outcome was the between-group difference in change from baseline to 2 years in the mean score across all five normalised Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales (KOOS5). RESULTS:Forty-four patients (of the estimated 72) underwent randomisation; 22 in each group. Sixteen participants (36%) were non-blinded and eight participants (36%) from the sham group crossed over to the surgery group prior to the 2-year follow-up. At 2?years, both groups reported clinically relevant improvements (surgery 21.8, skin incisions only 13.6), the mean difference between groups was 8.2 in favour of surgery, which is slightly less than the cut-off of 10 prespecified to represent a clinically relevant difference; judged by the 95% CI (-3.4 to 19.8), a possibility of clinically relevant difference could not be excluded. In total, nine participants experienced 11 adverse events; six in the surgery group and three in the skin-incisions-only group. CONCLUSION:We found greater improvement from arthroscopic partial meniscectomy compared with skin incisions only at 2 years, with the statistical uncertainty of the between-group difference including what could be considered clinically relevant. Because of the study being underpowered, nearly half in the sham group being non-blinded and one-third crossing over to surgery, the results cannot be generalised to the greater patient population. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT01264991.