Improvement in outcomes after implantation of a novel polyurethane meniscal scaffold for the treatment of medial meniscus deficiency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Meniscal injury resulting in segmental loss of meniscal tissue is a major risk factor for the development of osteoarthritis. Tissue engineering strategies have provided scaffolds for meniscal regeneration in order to establish a treatment option for patients with limited opportunities for meniscal reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results 2 years after implantation of a polyurethane scaffold for chronic segmental medial meniscus deficiency following partial medial meniscectomy. METHODS: Eighteen patients were treated with arthroscopic implantation of an ActiFit(®) (Orteq Sports Medicine) polyurethane meniscal scaffold for meniscus deficiency of the medial meniscus. Patients were followed up at 6, 12, and 24 months. Clinical outcome was assessed using patient-reported outcome scores (KOOS, KSS, UCLA activity scale, VAS for pain). Radiological outcome was assessed using MRI at 6, 12, and 24 months by evaluating scaffold morphology, scaffold integration, and additional joint injury, as well as joint inflammation. RESULTS: Eighteen patients with a median age of 32.5 years (range 17-49) were enrolled. Statistically significant improvements were present in all patients, but one at 2 years compared to baseline in all categories. Complete resorption of the scaffold occurred in one patient representing a failure to treatment. MRI showed abnormal signal intensity of the scaffold when compared to residual meniscal tissue but without synovitis or joint inflammation. Extrusion of the scaffold was present in four patients. No correlation between scaffold extrusion and clinical outcome was observed. CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic implantation of a polyurethane meniscal scaffold in patients with chronic segmental medial meniscus deficiency is not only a safe procedure but leads to good clinical results at a 2-year follow-up. Scaffold extrusion did not appear to affect clinical outcome. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".