The American Journal of Sports

Medicine http://ajs.sagepub.com/

Arthroscopic Meniscus Allograft Transplantation in Male Professional Soccer Players: A 36-Month

Follow-up Study
Maurilio Marcacci, Giulio Maria Marcheggiani Muccioli, Alberto Grassi, Margherita Ricci, Kyriakos Tsapralis, Gianni
Nanni, Tommaso Bonanzinga and Stefano Zaffagnini
Am J Sports Med published online November 8, 2013
DOI: 10.1177/0363546513508763

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://ajs.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/11/07/0363546513508763
A more recent version of this article was published on - Jan 31, 2014

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:
American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine

Additional services and information for The American Journal of Sports Medicine can be found at:
Published online November 8, 2013 in advance of the print journal.

P<P
Email Alerts: http://ajs.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://ajs.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Version of Record - Jan 31, 2014

>> OnlineFirst Version of Record - Nov 8, 2013

What is This?

Downloaded from ajs.sagepub.com at UNIV OF UTAH SALT LAKE CITY on November 27, 2014
 AJSM PreView, published on November 8, 2013 as doi:10.1177/0363546513508763

Arthroscopic Meniscus Allograft

Transplantation in Male Professional
Soccer Players
A 36-Month Follow-up Study
Maurilio Marcacci,* MD, Giulio Maria Marcheggiani Muccioli,*y MD, Alberto Grassi,* MD,
Margherita Ricci,z MD, Kyriakos Tsapralis,z MD, Gianni Nanni,z MD,
Tommaso Bonanzinga,* MD, and Stefano Zaffagnini,* MD
Investigation performed at Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Università di Bologna, Bologna, Italy

Background: Meniscus allograft transplantation (MAT) is an option for symptomatic patients who have undergone subtotal
meniscectomy and can potentially result in pain relief and increased function.
Hypothesis: Professional soccer players would benefit from arthroscopic MAT in terms of pain, knee function, and return to play
at 36-month follow-up.
Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4.
Methods: Twelve male patients who had undergone MAT (6 medial, 6 lateral) were prospectively evaluated at 12- and 36-month
follow-up. The mean age at the time of surgery was 24.5 6 3.6 years (range, 19-29 years), and the mean time from meniscectomy
to surgery was 37 6 31 months (range, 2-82 months). The transplantation was performed in patients who had undergone subtotal
meniscectomy using an arthroscopic bone plug–free technique with a single tibial tunnel plus ‘‘all-inside’’ meniscus sutures. The
anterior horn of the transplanted meniscus was sutured to the capsule and to the remnant of the anterior horn of the native menis-
cus. Seven patients (58%) underwent concurrent procedures. All patients were evaluated at follow-up by the Tegner, Lysholm,
International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective, IKDC objective, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities
Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain scores. Information regarding rehabilitation, return to
play, and return to official competition was recorded.
Results: Eleven of the 12 patients (92%) returned to play soccer. At 36-month follow-up, 9 patients (75%) were still playing as
professionals (Tegner score of 10), whereas 2 patients (17%) were playing as semiprofessionals (Tegner score of 9). The mean
time from surgery to the end of rehabilitation was 7.5 6 2 months, whereas the mean time to official competition was 10.5 6
2.6 months. Patients demonstrated significant improvements on the median Tegner score from 8 (interquartile range, 3-10) to
10 (interquartile range, 9-10) (P = .0391); the mean Lysholm score from 67 6 14 to 92 6 10 (P = .0021); the mean IKDC subjective
score from 61.8 6 16.3 to 85.3 6 9.8 (P = .0026); the mean IKDC objective score from 1 A, 8 B, 1 C, and 2 D to 7 A and 5 B (P =
.0077); the mean WOMAC score from 77.1 6 15.9 to 92.2 6 9.1 (P = .0242); and the mean VAS score from 61 6 16 to 29 6 32 (P =
.0029) at 12-month follow-up. There were no significant improvements in these outcomes at 36-month follow-up. One patient
developed a knee infection after MAT plus anterior cruciate ligament allograft reconstruction. This complication was successfully
treated, but the patient stopped playing soccer (Tegner score of 3 at 36-month follow-up), and this was considered a failure (8%).
Conclusion: Arthroscopic MAT in professional soccer players allowed a return to play at the same level (Tegner score of 10) in
75% of the cases at 36-month follow-up.
Keywords: knee; arthroscopic surgery; meniscus allograft transplantation; professional soccer players

To treat meniscus tears in professional soccer players (a
particular population of patients in whom these injuries
are very common2), meniscectomy is sometimes preferred
to meniscus suturing by patients and surgeons. This is
The American Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol. XX, No. X
DOI: 10.1177/0363546513508763
Ó 2013 The Author(s)
because of the long rehabilitation period required after
meniscus sutures3 and the high failure rate (20.2%-
24.3%) reported after this surgery.19
After removal of the meniscus, recurrent joint effusions
and pain may develop, affecting the career of athletes.10,15
It is also well accepted that complete or even partial menis-
cectomy can lead to osteoarthritis in the affected compart-
ment in the long term8,9 and in rare cases to severe acute
chondrolysis, especially in soccer players.18

1
Downloaded from ajs.sagepub.com at UNIV OF UTAH SALT LAKE CITY on November 27, 2014
2 Marcacci et al
Meniscus allograft transplantation (MAT) is a viable
option for symptomatic patients who have undergone
total/subtotal meniscectomy and can potentially result in
pain relief and increased function.20,23,24,27 However, there
is no consensus on the use of MAT in a high-demand pop-
ulation such as soccer players. Furthermore, opinions vary
on the amount of arthritic changes that would be contrain-
dications to meniscus transplantation.5
This procedure has been recently performed in nonpro-
fessional athletes, and the results have been promising.1,6
What is still unknown is whether this procedure can be an
effective treatment for ‘‘postmeniscectomy syndrome’’ in
professional soccer players.
The purpose of this study was to report clinical out-
comes and the return to sport in a consecutive series of
symptomatic male professional soccer players who had
undergone previous subtotal meniscectomy and were trea-
ted with arthroscopic MAT. We hypothesized that the use
of this technique would result in reduced symptoms
(pain), lead to improved knee function, and allow a return
to play at the same premeniscectomy level at a minimum
36-month follow-up.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
All professional soccer players who underwent arthro-
scopic MAT without bone plugs at our institution between
2008 and 2010 (a part of a larger prospective database of
MATs) were included in this study. More specifically,
inclusion criteria were identified as (1) unicompartmental
knee pain after subtotal meniscectomy (meniscus loss
.75%), (2) a stable knee or anterior cruciate ligament
(ACL) deficiencies stabilized at the time of the index sur-
gery, (3) a patient between 15 and 55 years of age (on the
basis of previous studies7), and (4) a contralateral healthy
knee. Exclusion criteria included (1) concomitant posterior
cruciate ligament insufficiency of the involved knee, (2) dif-
fuse Outerbridge21 grade IV disease in the affected joint,
(3) uncorrected malformations or axial malalignment in
the lower extremity, (4) systemic or local infections, (5) his-
tory of anaphylactoid reactions, (6) systemic administra-
tion of any type of corticosteroid or immunosuppressive
agent within 30 days of surgery, (7) evidence of osteonecro-
sis in the involved knee, (8) history of autoimmune dis-
eases, and (9) neurological abnormalities or conditions
that would preclude the patient’s adherence to the rehabil-
itation program.
Planning, Graft Selection, Sizing,
Surgical Technique, and Rehabilitation
All patients were screened with magnetic resonance imaging
scans, standard (anteroposterior and lateral) radiographs,
y
Address correspondence to Giulio Maria Marcheggiani Muccioli, MD, Laboratorio di Biomeccanica ed Innovazione Tecnologica, Istituto Ortopedico
Rizzoli, via di Barbiano, 1/10, 40136 Bologna, Italy (e-mail: marcheggianimuccioli@me.com).
*Clinica Ortopedica e Traumatologica II, Laboratorio di Biomeccanica ed Innovazione Tecnologica, Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Università di Bologna,
Bologna, Italy.
z
Isokinetic FIFA Medical Centre of Excellence, Bologna, Italy.
The authors declared that they have no conflicts of interest in the authorship and publication of this contribution.
Downloaded from ajs.sagepub.com at UNIV OF UTAH SALT LAKE CITY on November 27, 2014
The American Journal of Sports Medicine
and standing anteroposterior and Rosenberg radiographs
before surgery to determine their suitability for MAT. A
detailed medical history was obtained, and a complete phys-
ical examination was also performed.
Fresh-frozen (–80°C) nonirradiated and non–antigen-
matched allografts were used. The age criterion for donors
was 15 to 35 years. Radiographic measurements and
anthropometric parameters were used to establish the cor-
rect size of the graft.
All athletes underwent MAT in our Sports Medicine
Department, which was performed by 2 senior authors
(M.M. and S.Z.). The transplantation was performed using
an arthroscopic bone plug–free technique. A single tibial
tunnel was used to fix the posterior horn, and the graft
was fixed to the capsule with ‘‘all-inside’’ stitches (nonab-
sorbable ULTRABRAID No. 0 and poly-L-lactide bioab-
sorbable ULTRA FAST-FIX, Smith & Nephew, Andover,
Massachusetts). The anterior horn of the transplanted
meniscus was then fixed to the remnant of the anterior
horn of the native meniscus by an outside-in standard
suturing technique. The anterior horn of the transplanted
meniscus was also fixed to the capsule with the sutures
that were previously placed on the anterior horn (during
graft preparation) tied through the corresponding arthro-
scopic portal. Patients with ligamentous instability under-
went concurrent ligament reconstruction surgery to
restore stability. One patient with focal Outerbridge21
grade IV cartilage disease in the affected joint underwent
concurrent osteochondral scaffold implantation. Another
patient who had previously undergone arthroscopic autol-
ogous chondrocyte implantation (ACI) presented with an
Outerbridge21 grade II cartilage lesion at the time of MAT.
The postoperative rehabilitation protocol started with
a 2-week period with no weightbearing and immobiliza-
tion, followed by toe-touch weightbearing, restriction of
range of motion (ROM) (0°-90° during weeks 3-4 and
then free ROM), isometric exercises, and closed chain
strengthening. At week 6 postoperatively, full weightbear-
ing was started, and patients were allowed to fully flex the
knee. Sport-specific exercises started after 3 months, and
a return to noncontact activities was not allowed until
the fourth month. Patients were advised not to resume
playing soccer before 8 months postoperatively.
The sizing protocol,22,26 operative technique,17 and
rehabilitation protocol12,17 were followed as described in
the literature.
Patient Data
Thirteen patients met the inclusion criteria of the study.
One patient was excluded, as he had not been playing soc-
cer for more than 1 year because of problems not related to
his knee status. All of the remaining 12 patients were male
Vol. XX, No. X, XXXX MAT in Professional Soccer Players 3

TABLE 1
Patient Dataa
BMI at Time
Age at BMI at Final Chondral From
Patient Age at Final Surgery, Follow-up, Damage at Meniscectomy,
No. Surgery, y Follow-up, y Knee Meniscus kg/m2 kg/m2 Previous Surgery Concomitant Surgery Surgery mo

1 23 26 Right Medial 22.8 22.8 ACL, MM, LM R-ACL III, MTP 42.8
2 25 28 Left Medial 23.8 23.5 ACL, MM, ACI Microfracture (MFC) III, MFC 78.7
3 19 22 Left Lateral 23.4 23.4 ACL, LM — — 1.8
4 23 26 Right Lateral 22.7 22.7 LM Microfracture (LFC) III, LFC 56.0
5 24 27 Left Medial 23.5 23.5 ACL, R-ACL, medial — — 6.5
meniscus suturing, MM
6 29 32 Left Lateral 22.2 22.2 LM, microfracture (LFC) OCS (LFC) IV, LFC 29.3
7 20 23 Right Medial 23.4 23.4 ACL, MM R-ACL — 6.0
8 26 29 Right Lateral 22.5 22.8 2 LM Microfracture (LFC) III, LCF 12.8
9 26 29 Right Medial 25.1 25.1 MM Chondrocyte III, MFC 35.2
harvesting
10 27 30 Left Lateral 23.8 24.0 2 LM — II, LFC 70.5
11 21 24 Left Lateral 24.2 23.5 LM — II, LFC and LTP 19.4
12 31 34 Left Medial 20.8 20.8 ACL, ACI, loose — II, MFC 85.9
body removal

a
ACI, autologous chondrocyte implantation; ACL, anterior cruciate ligament; BMI, body mass index; LFC, lateral femoral condyle; LM, lateral meniscectomy;
LTP, lateral tibial plateau; MFC, medial femoral condyle; MM, medial meniscectomy; MTP, medial tibial plateau; OCS, osteochondral scaffolding; R-ACL, ante-
rior cruciate ligament revision with allograft.

professional soccer players and were included in this study.
Five patients (42%) were still playing soccer at the time of
enrollment, but with performance impairment due to knee
pain, while 7 patients (58%) played soccer as professionals
in the last year, but they were unable to play at the time of
enrollment. Their mean age at the time of surgery was
24.5 6 3.6 years (range, 19-29 years). For MAT, the medial
meniscus was involved in 6 patients (50%) and the lateral
meniscus in the remaining 6 patients (50%). The mean time
from meniscectomy to surgery was 37 6 31 months (range,
2-82 months). The meniscus lesions of all patients were
related to sport trauma. Seven patients (58%) underwent 1
concurrent procedure with MAT (2 revision ACL reconstruc-
tions with allografts, 3 microfractures, 1 osteochondral scaf-
folding, 1 chondrocyte harvesting). See Table 1 for details.
Follow-up Evaluation
The primary outcome (returning to play at the same level)
and time points were defined before enrollment. The play-
ers were prospectively evaluated before surgery and at 12-
and 36-month follow-up by 2 independent orthopaedic sur-
geons, who did not take part in the surgery and were
blinded to preoperative patient status, affected side
(medial or lateral meniscus), and concurrent procedures.
Every complication related to surgery and any reinterven-
tion(s) were recorded during the follow-up period.
A 100-point visual analog scale (VAS) was used to
assess the degree of knee pain. Functional follow-up
included the subjective International Knee Documentation
Committee (IKDC),14 Lysholm,25 and Western Ontario and
McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC)4
scores as well as the objective IKDC score.13 The overall
Tegner activity level25 was also recorded (obtained at the
different evaluation times and also before injury retrospec-
tively on the basis of patient recall).
Data regarding rehabilitation and return to sport were
collected as well. Dates of admission and discharge from
the rehabilitation clinic were recorded to establish the
duration of the rehabilitative program. The number of
rehabilitative sessions performed at the gymnasium, in
the pool, and on the field was recorded. The time to return
to full training with the team was defined as the interval
between surgery and discharge from rehabilitation, while
the time to return to play was defined as the interval
between surgery and the first official match.
Statistical Analysis
Statistical analysis was performed using Analyse-it 2.00
(Analyse-it Software Ltd, Leeds, United Kingdom). Statis-
tical comparison between the preoperative and follow-up
parametric scores was performed using the Student t
test. The population was tested for normal distribution
before the t test was applied. For differences between
time points in the Tegner score, the nonparametric Wil-
coxon test was used. For differences in the objective
IKDC score, the Pearson x2 test was utilized. Comparison
between groups based on medial versus lateral meniscus,
isolated versus combined MAT, and mild versus severe
chondral damage was performed using the Student t test.
A life table survival analysis with the log-rank test was
used to compare cumulative rates of return to training
and competition in the subgroups.
The level of significance was set at P \ .05. Results are
expressed as the mean 6 standard deviation for paramet-
ric values and the median (interquartile range [IQR]) for
nonparametric values.

Downloaded from ajs.sagepub.com at UNIV OF UTAH SALT LAKE CITY on November 27, 2014
4 Marcacci et al The American Journal of Sports Medicine

TABLE 2
Clinical Outcomesa

Tegner Lysholm Subjective IKDC Objective IKDC WOMAC VAS

Return to Return to
Patient No. Preinj Preop 1 y 3 y Preop 1 y 3 y Preop 1y 3y Preop 1y 3 y Preop 1y 3y Preop 1 y 3 y Training, mo Match, mo

1 10 8 10 10 75 100 100 56.3 82.8 98.0 D B A 97.9 100.0 100.0 40 10 0 8.0 12.0
2 10 10 10 10 71 99 99 71.3 93.1 93.1 A A A 89.6 96.9 96.9 70 10 10 4.4 8.0
3 10 1 10 10 26 99 99 16.1 92.0 98.0 C A A 36.5 96.9 96.9 70 0 10 6.2 6.7
4 10 10 9 9 81 81 95 70.1 62.1 93.1 B B B 86.7 86.7 91.0 70 90 15 6.7 12.1
5 10 6 9 9 69 99 99 56.0 93.0 98.0 B A A 68.0 96.9 98.0 60 10 10 9.0 12.0
6 10 3 7 10 71 81 99 56.3 82.0 93.1 B B A 68.0 93.0 96.9 60 35 10 12.0 15.7
7 10 3 2 3 50 68 65 56.0 71.2 65.0 D B B 68.0 70.0 75.0 80 90 60 6.2 —
8 10 8 10 10 75 95 81 71.3 92.0 82.8 B A B 86.0 93.0 91.0 70 15 20 6.2 7.5
9 10 10 10 10 71 95 95 71.3 85.0 93.1 B B A 82.0 93.0 96.9 45 20 10 8.5 10.6
10 10 3 10 10 69 99 99 71.3 92.0 96.0 B A A 86.0 96.0 98.0 55 15 10 5.8 8.8
11 10 10 10 10 71 95 99 76.0 93.0 98.0 B A A 82.0 96.9 100.0 30 0 5 7.0 8.0
12 10 10 10 10 69 95 95 70.0 85.0 82.0 B B B 75.0 86.7 91.0 80 50 25 8.0 12.0

a
IKDC, International Knee Documentation Committee; preinj, preinjury; preop, preoperatively; VAS, visual analog scale; WOMAC, Western Ontario and
McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index.

Ethics
Study approval was obtained from the institutional review
board. Informed consent forms complied with European Union
laws and were signed by the patients before enrollment.

RESULTS

All 12 patients were available for 12- and 36-month follow-

up. Eleven of the 12 patients (92%) returned to play soccer.
At 12-month follow-up, 8 (67%) of the patients returned to
playing soccer at the same activity level (Tegner score of
10) as before injury. The percentage increased at 36-month
follow-up, with 9 patients (75%) playing as professionals
(Tegner score of 10). Two patients (17%) were playing as
semiprofessionals for reasons not directly related to knee
performance (Tegner score of 9).
At 12-month follow-up, all scores improved significantly
from baseline. The median Tegner score improved from 8
(IQR, 3-10) to 10 (IQR, 9-10) (P = .0391); the mean Lysholm
score from 67 6 14 to 92 6 10 (P = .0021); the mean subjec-
tive IKDC score from 61.8 6 16.3 to 85.3 6 9.8 (P = .0026); Figure 1. Trends in return to training (straight line) and return
the mean WOMAC score from 77.1 6 15.9 to 92.2 6 9.1 (P = to official match play (dotted line) for all evaluated patients.
.0242); the mean VAS score from 61 6 16 to 29 6 32 (P =
.0029); and the objective IKDC score from 1 A, 8 B, 1 C,
and 2 D to 7 A and 5 B (P = .0077). At 36-month follow- to starting to train was 7.3 6 1.9 months, while the mean
up, the clinical evaluation showed similar results compared time to return to official competition was 10.3 6 2.7
with those of the 12-month follow-up evaluation. The months (Figure 1).
median Tegner score was 10 (IQR, 10-10), the mean No significant differences in the return to training and
Lysholm score was 94 6 10, the mean subjective IKDC score return to first official competition were found between
was 90.9 6 9.8, the mean WOMAC score was 94.3 6 6.9, medial or lateral MAT, patients with none/mild
and the mean VAS score was 15 6 15. Furthermore, 8 knees (\Outerbridge21 grade III) or severe (Outerbridge21
were classified as A and 4 as B according to the objective grade III) chondral damage, and isolated or combined
IKDC score. See Table 2 for detailed outcomes and pain MAT (Figure 2).
scores of each patient. During the follow-up period, 3 patients (25%) under-
The mean duration of rehabilitation was 6.9 6 1.8 went 1 surgical procedure because of issues not directly
months, with a mean number of 154 6 62 sessions per- related to MAT. One patient (8.3%) underwent arthro-
formed at the gymnasium (95 6 39), in the pool (35 6 scopic plica excision at 3 months after MAT, 1 (8.3%)
13), and on the field (24 6 16). The mean time from surgery underwent ACI at 1 month after the main surgery, and

Downloaded from ajs.sagepub.com at UNIV OF UTAH SALT LAKE CITY on November 27, 2014
Vol. XX, No. X, XXXX MAT in Professional Soccer Players 5

Figure 2. Differences between return to training and return to official match play in different subgroups of patients depending on
(A) chondral damage, (B) involved meniscus, and (C) concomitant procedures. No significant differences were reported (P \ .05).

another patient (8.3%) underwent arthroscopic intra- DISCUSSION

articular loose body removal at 8 months after MAT. At
second-look arthroscopic surgery, the grafts presented no
tears and showed good healing to the capsule.
One patient developed a knee infection after combined
medial MAT plus revision ACL reconstruction with an allo-
graft. This player was successfully treated with oral antibi-
otics and 2 arthroscopic lavages. Although he completed
the rehabilitative program, he was not able to return to
playing soccer at any level because of knee pain. He had
a Tegner score of 3 at 36-month follow-up, and this was
considered a failure (8%).
The most important finding of the present study was that,
at 36-month follow-up, 92% of the players were able to
return to play soccer, and 75% were able to return to their
preinjury professional level of activity (Tegner score of 10)
after arthroscopic MAT without bone plugs. Our patients
reported statistically significant improvements in func-
tional outcomes (Tegner, Lysholm, IKDC, WOMAC) and
symptoms (VAS for pain) at 12 months after surgery, and
these results remained stable at 36-month follow-up. These
results are comparable with those of a series of

Downloaded from ajs.sagepub.com at UNIV OF UTAH SALT LAKE CITY on November 27, 2014
6 Marcacci et al
nonprofessional soccer players or athletes. Alentorn-Geli
et al1 reported that 85.7% of players returned to play com-
petitive soccer at lower levels (Tegner score of 9) at a mean
follow-up of 36 months. Chalmers et al6 reported that 77%
of high-level athletes (mostly baseball and basketball play-
ers) returned to their previous level of activity (Tegner
score of 8) and that 70% were able to return to their desired
level of play at a mean follow-up of 3.3 years. The higher
rate of return to competitive play reported by Alentorn-
Geli et al1 could be explained by the fact that in their
study, no ipsilateral knee ligament reconstruction or carti-
lage repair surgeries were performed before or at the time
of MAT. In fact, Chalmers et al6 reported a rate of 54% of
concomitant procedures (mostly cartilage repairs), similar
to the 58% reported in the present work.
In our series of male professional soccer players, the
mean time from surgery to the start of training was
7.3 6 1.9 months, and the mean time to return to official
competition was 10.3 6 2.7 months. Alentorn-Geli et al1
reported that patients returned to play soccer after
a mean postoperative period of 7.6 months, but they did
not specify if it was for training or official competition.
Chalmers et al6 recalled a mean time to return to the pre-
injury athletic level of 16.5 6 6.5 months, but their
patients were collegiate athletes (Tegner score of 8).
No significant differences in the return to training and
return to first official competition were found between
medial or lateral MAT, patients with none/mild or severe
chondral damage, and isolated or combined MAT. Chalm-
ers et al6 did not show differences in functional outcomes
or satisfaction between the same subgroups. Perhaps
both series are too small to see differences between these
subgroups of patients.
One (8%) failure (infection) was reported in the present
series, comparable with the 6.6% (mechanical graft failure)
shown by Alentorn-Geli et al1 with a 2-tunnel bone plug–
free arthroscopic technique. Differently, Chalmers et al6
recalled a 23% rate of revision surgery that failed to reach
the preoperative goal, using a bone plug arthroscopic tech-
nique. In the present series, 25% of the patients underwent
a subsequent surgical procedure, but they all returned to
sport at the preinjury level, and the surgeries were per-
formed because of issues not directly related to MAT.
Chalmers et al6 reported that 30% of patients had subse-
quent procedures, but most of them (75%) were failures
requiring revision surgery.
The surgical technique used in the patients in the pres-
ent study employed a single tibial tunnel for MAT that is
useful to avoid graft mismatch (always possible) and can
be used in cases of symptomatic patients after previous
subtotal meniscectomy. Moreover, with this technique,
the anatomic continuity of the meniscus structure was
restored, suturing the anterior horn of the transplanted
meniscus to the remnant of the anterior horn of the native
meniscus on the tibia, according to Verdonk et al.27
To our knowledge, this is the first study to report the
outcomes of arthroscopic MAT in male professional soccer
players. This prospective case series confirms that arthro-
scopic MAT would not preclude professional soccer players
from returning to sport at the maximum level at 36-month
Downloaded from ajs.sagepub.com at UNIV OF UTAH SALT LAKE CITY on November 27, 2014
The American Journal of Sports Medicine
follow-up. Longer term follow-up is necessary to provide
information on the efficacy and longevity of MAT in this
particular population of athletes.
The present work has several limitations. The main lim-
itation is the small sample size and the broad range of con-
comitant knee injuries within our cohort. Unfortunately, it
is inevitable that this complex patient population has mul-
tiple knee comorbidities that require intervention at the
time of MAT.1,6 The same limitation applies to most of
the recent literature regarding complex knee reconstruc-
tions.11,16,20 Another limitation is the relatively short-
term follow-up, which raises the question of whether deg-
radation of outcomes will be seen with time, as other series
have shown. Moreover, the lack of follow-up with advanced
imaging or second-look arthroscopic surgery does not allow
us to comment on the status of the transplanted menisci in
these cases.
CONCLUSION
Arthroscopic MAT in professional soccer players allowed
them to return to play at the same level (Tegner score of
10) in 75% of the cases at 36-month follow-up.
REFERENCES
1. Alentorn-Geli E, Vazquez RS, Diaz PA, Cusco X, Cugat R. Arthro-
scopic meniscal transplants in soccer players: outcomes at 2- to 5-
year follow-up. Clin J Sport Med. 2010;20(5):340-343.
2. Baker BE, Peckham AC, Pupparo F, Sanborn JC. Review of meniscal
injury and associated sports. Am J Sports Med. 1985;13(1):1-4.
3. Barcia AM, Kozlowski EJ, Tokish JM. Return to sport after meniscal
repair. Clin Sports Med. 2012;31(1):155-166.
4. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW. Val-
idation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring
clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug
therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol.
1988;15(12):1833-1840.
5. Cameron JC, Saha S. Meniscal allograft transplantation for unicom-
partmental arthritis of the knee. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997;337:
164-171.
6. Chalmers PN, Karas V, Sherman SL, Cole BJ. Return to high-level
sport after meniscal allograft transplantation. Arthroscopy. 2013;
29(3):539-544.
7. Elattar M, Dhollander A, Verdonk R, Almqvist KF, Verdonk P. Twenty-
six years of meniscal allograft transplantation: is it still experimental?
A meta-analysis of 44 trials. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc.
2011;19(2):147-157.
8. Fabricant PD, Jokl P. Surgical outcomes after arthroscopic partial
meniscectomy. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2007;15(11):647-653.
9. Fairbank TJ. Knee joint changes after meniscectomy. J Bone Joint
Surg Br. 1948;30(4):664-670.
10. Giuliani JR, Burns TC, Svoboda SJ, Cameron KL, Owens BD. Treat-
ment of meniscal injuries in young athletes. J Knee Surg. 2011;
24(2):93-100.
11. Gomoll AH, Kang RW, Chen AL, Cole BJ. Triad of cartilage restora-
tion for unicompartmental arthritis treatment in young patients:
meniscus allograft transplantation, cartilage repair and osteotomy.
J Knee Surg. 2009;22(2):137-141.
12. Heckmann TP, Barber-Westin SD, Noyes FR. Meniscal repair and
transplantation: indications, techniques, rehabilitation, and clinical
outcome. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2006;36(10):795-814.
Vol. XX, No. X, XXXX
13. Hefti F, Muller W, Jakob RP, Staubli HU. Evaluation of knee ligament
injuries with the IKDC form. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc.
1993;1(3-4):226-234.
14. Higgins LD, Taylor MK, Park D, et al. Reliability and validity of the
International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective
knee form. Joint Bone Spine. 2007;74(6):594-599.
15. Jorgensen U, Sonne-Holm S, Lauridsen F, Rosenklint A. Long-term
follow-up of meniscectomy in athletes: a prospective longitudinal
study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1987;69(1):80-83.
16. LaPrade RF, Wills NJ, Spiridonov SI, Perkinson S. A prospective out-
comes study of meniscal allograft transplantation. Am J Sports Med.
2010;38(9):1804-1812.
17. Marcacci M, Zaffagnini S, Marcheggiani Muccioli GM, et al. Meniscal
allograft transplantation without bone plugs: a 3-year minimum
follow-up study. Am J Sports Med. 2012;40(2):395-403.
18. Mariani PP, Garofalo R, Margheritini F. Chondrolysis after partial lat-
eral meniscectomy in athletes. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc.
2008;16(6):574-580.
19. Nepple JJ, Dunn WR, Wright RW. Meniscal repair outcomes at
greater than five years: a systematic literature review and meta-
analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(24):2222-2227.
For reprints and permission queries, please visit SAGE’s Web site at http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Downloaded from ajs.sagepub.com at UNIV OF UTAH SALT LAKE CITY on November 27, 2014
MAT in Professional Soccer Players 7
20. Noyes FR, Barber-Westin SD, Rankin M. Meniscal transplantation in
symptomatic patients less than fifty years old. J Bone Joint Surg Am.
2005;87 Suppl 1(Pt 2):149-165.
21. Outerbridge RE. The etiology of chondromalacia patellae. J Bone
Joint Surg Br. 1961;43:752-757.
22. Pollard ME, Kang Q, Berg EE. Radiographic sizing for meniscal trans-
plantation. Arthroscopy. 1995;11(6):684-687.
23. Rath E, Richmond JC, Yassir W, Albright JD, Gundogan F. Meniscal
allograft transplantation: two- to eight-year results. Am J Sports Med.
2001;29(4):410-414.
24. Ryu RK, Dunbar VW, Morse GG. Meniscal allograft replacement: a
1-year to 6-year experience. Arthroscopy. 2002;18(9):989-994.
25. Tegner Y, Lysholm J. Rating systems in the evaluation of knee liga-
ment injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1985;198:43-49.
26. Van Thiel GS, Verma N, Yanke A, Basu S, Farr J, Cole B. Meniscal
allograft size can be predicted by height, weight, and gender.
Arthroscopy. 2009;25(7):722-727.
27. Verdonk PC, Verstraete KL, Almqvist KF, et al. Meniscal allograft
transplantation: long-term clinical results with radiological and mag-
netic resonance imaging correlations. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol
Arthrosc. 2006;14(8):694-706.