ReviewWorld journal of methodology2026
Rethinking meniscal repair in patients over 40: Extending the boundaries of joint preservation.
Review in World journal of methodology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article provides a comprehensive overview of current perspectives on meniscal repair, with a particular focus on the evolving situation for patients over 40. In the past, meniscectomy was the most common treatment for meniscal tears in this group due to presumptions about its poor capacity for healing. The paradigm has shifted in favor of meniscal preservation, thanks to recent developments in arthroscopic procedures, a deeper understanding of meniscal biology, and the crucial recognition of the role that meniscal tissue plays in long-term knee health. Results from important primary studies, meta-analyses, and recent systematic reviews are summarized in this article. We address the advantages of meniscal repair over meniscectomy in terms of long-term results and functional preservation, considering conflicting data and the significance of a patient's unique evaluation. In addition to the substantial influence of biologic augmentation methods like platelet-rich plasma and bone marrow aspirate concentrate in accelerating healing rates, the role of conservative management for degenerative tears is examined. Additionally, we compare all-inside and inside-out repair methods and look at the crucial elements of patient and tear selection, surgical methods, and technological advancements. Future research directions are paved by highlighting unresolved issues, such as the standardization of terminology and outcome definitions. Overall, the findings indicate that meniscal repair is no longer strictly contraindicated based solely on age, with careful patient selection and the strategic application of innovative techniques providing older patients with improved long-term outcomes and significant chondroprotective benefits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.