Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38744802›Full record

ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2024

The Current State of Meniscus Replacements.

B S van Minnen, T G van Tienen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

B S van MinnenOrthopaedic Research Lab, Radboud University Medical Centre, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. branco.vanminnen@radboudumc.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8431-4167
T G van TienenOrthopaedic Research Lab, Radboud University Medical Centre, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2005-0550

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe field of meniscus replacement is changing continuously, with new devices emerging and others disappearing from the market. With the current tendency to preserve the knee joint, meniscus implants may become more relevant than ever. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the current state of partial and total meniscus replacements that have been developed beyond the academic phase. The available clinical and pre-clinical data is evaluated, and omissions are identified. RECENT

findingsRecent systematic reviews have shown a lack of homogenous clinical data on the CMI and Actifit meniscal scaffolds, especially regarding long-term performance without concomitant surgical interventions. Clinical studies on the medial total meniscus prostheses NUsurface and Artimis are ongoing, with the NUsurface being several years ahead. New techniques for meniscus replacement are rapidly developing, including the Artimis lateral meniscus prosthesis and the MeniscoFix 3D-printed scaffold. All evaluated clinical studies point towards improved clinical outcomes after implantation of partial and total meniscus replacements. Long-term data on survival and performance is of low quality for CMI and Actifit and is unavailable yet for NUsurface and Artimis. It is of major importance that future research focuses on optimizing fixation methods and identifying the optimal treatment strategy for each patient group. New techniques for total and partial replacement of the medial and lateral meniscus will be followed with interest.

Indexed as

Knee joint meniscusMeniscus implantMeniscus prosthesisMeniscus replacementMeniscus scaffold

Identifiers

PMID38744802
PMCPMC11219664

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.