Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsRetrospective StudyEurope PMCOpen access

Research on the application effect of arthroscopic access modification in meniscal injury repair

Li S., Sun H., Zhang J., Guo H., Yan L., Tang F.

Retrospective Study with a reported sample of 100 on Meniscus Injury, published in J Orthop Surg Res (2025) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

Open my reading list
Level C· Early human research exploring benefitsEvidence level of this study

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

  • Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
  • Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
  • Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
  • Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
  • Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
Read the A–D evidence level guide

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Retrospective Study
Journal
J Orthop Surg Res (2025)
Reported sample size
100
Source database
Europe PMC
PMID
39754209
PMCID
PMC11697758
DOI
10.1186/s13018-024-05434-z

Abstract (original English)

Objective To investigate the application value of arthroscopic channel modification in meniscal injury repair. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the data of 100 patients with meniscus injuries treated with knee arthroscopy from December 2022 to December 2023 and divided them into a control group and a modified group according to the application of "arthroscopic access modification technology". We compared the operation time, postoperative hospitalization time, VAS score, Lysholm knee function score, postoperative complications, and postoperative images of the patients in these two groups. We compared the operation time, postoperative hospitalization time, pre- and postoperative VAS scores, Lysholm knee function scores, postoperative complications and postoperative imaging indices of the patients in the two groups. Results All patients successfully underwent surgery and were followed up without intraoperative vascular or nerve injury or postoperative complications such as infection, wound necrosis or thrombosis. The average follow-up time was 16.03 ± 3.69 months; the average operation time and postoperative hospitalization time of the modified group were significantly better than those of the control group were (P 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference (P > 0.05). Conclusion The improved arthroscopic access technique can make the entry and exit of instruments

What this study does not prove

  • • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
  • • Without an adequate control group, treatment effects cannot be separated from other factors.

Evidence level

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.

How we grade evidence
HumansPostoperative ComplicationsArthroscopyTreatment OutcomeRetrospective StudiesFollow-Up StudiesAdultMiddle AgedFemaleMale

Browse all related research

Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.

Related research