Purpose: To evaluate the influence of age on midterm clinical outcomes and failures of meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT), aiming at investigating the efficacy of MAT in patients older than 50 years. Methods: In this case-control study, data on patients older than 50 years (older MAT [O-MAT] group) with at least 5 years of follow-up and a matched-pair group of patients younger than 30 years of age (younger MAT [Y-MAT] group) were extracted from a database of MAT procedures, performed with arthroscopic implantation of fresh-frozen meniscal allograft without bone plugs. Results: A matched-pair comparative analysis of midterm results and survival between 26 O-MAT patients and 26 Y-MAT patients was performed at a mean follow-up of 7.3 ± 2.2 years. All the clinical scores significantly improved from the baseline values in both the O-MAT and Y-MAT groups although with significantly lower scores in the O-MAT group. Two-thirds of O-MAT patients were able to return to a recreational level of sports activity. Only 2 patients in the O-MAT group underwent knee replacement, but the overall failure rate, also considering a clinical criterion, was 31% in the O-MAT group and 15% in the Y-MAT group (P = .3244). The mean survival time free from replacement or graft removal was 11.6 years in the O-MAT group and 12.3 years in the Y-MAT group (P = .691). Conclusions: MAT is able to provide symptom relief and functional improvement at midterm follow-up in patients older than 50 years although with inferior results and a higher failure rate compared with those younger than 30 years. MAT can be considered a viable option to treat patients older than 50 years. Level of Evidence: Level III, case-control study.

Meniscal Allograft Transplantation Is an Effective Treatment in Patients Older Than 50 Years but Yields Inferior Results Compared With Younger Patients: A Case-Control Study

Zaffagnini S.;Grassi A.;Macchiarola L.;Stefanelli F.;Coco V.;Marcacci M.;Andriolo L.;Filardo G.
2019

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the influence of age on midterm clinical outcomes and failures of meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT), aiming at investigating the efficacy of MAT in patients older than 50 years. Methods: In this case-control study, data on patients older than 50 years (older MAT [O-MAT] group) with at least 5 years of follow-up and a matched-pair group of patients younger than 30 years of age (younger MAT [Y-MAT] group) were extracted from a database of MAT procedures, performed with arthroscopic implantation of fresh-frozen meniscal allograft without bone plugs. Results: A matched-pair comparative analysis of midterm results and survival between 26 O-MAT patients and 26 Y-MAT patients was performed at a mean follow-up of 7.3 ± 2.2 years. All the clinical scores significantly improved from the baseline values in both the O-MAT and Y-MAT groups although with significantly lower scores in the O-MAT group. Two-thirds of O-MAT patients were able to return to a recreational level of sports activity. Only 2 patients in the O-MAT group underwent knee replacement, but the overall failure rate, also considering a clinical criterion, was 31% in the O-MAT group and 15% in the Y-MAT group (P = .3244). The mean survival time free from replacement or graft removal was 11.6 years in the O-MAT group and 12.3 years in the Y-MAT group (P = .691). Conclusions: MAT is able to provide symptom relief and functional improvement at midterm follow-up in patients older than 50 years although with inferior results and a higher failure rate compared with those younger than 30 years. MAT can be considered a viable option to treat patients older than 50 years. Level of Evidence: Level III, case-control study.
2019
Zaffagnini S.; Grassi A.; Macchiarola L.; Stefanelli F.; Coco V.; Marcacci M.; Andriolo L.; Filardo G.
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/717964
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 5
  • Scopus 25
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 22
social impact