Meniscal Allograft Transplantation: How Should We Be Doing It? A Systematic Review

PurposeWe undertook a systematic review to assess a number of the technical aspects of meniscal allograft transplantation (MAT) that have not been covered in other reviews. Specific variables studied included the indications for MAT, graft fixation method, rehabilitation protocols, outcome scores, and definition of failure.MethodsWe performed a systematic literature review of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases to determine the outcomes of meniscal transplantation at greater than 2 years postoperatively. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines were followed with a PRISMA checklist. The search was completed on January 5, 2014.ResultsThese queries returned 629 results from which 41 articles were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria. No studies in this review were randomized or controlled.ConclusionsMAT is a worthwhile procedure, with evidence that it provides pain relief and improved function, and good results reported in mid- to long-term studies. The procedure should be considered only in a patient with localized pain and a stable (or stabilized) and well-aligned (or realigned) knee. The controversial areas studied in this review include the following: there is no evidence to support fixation with either bone plugs or soft tissue; there is no standardized rehabilitation program, but it appears that full weight bearing by 6 weeks is not detrimental; and a clear and uniform definition of failure and use of consistent outcome scores would aid future reporting and analysis of the results of meniscal transplantation.Level of EvidenceLevel IV, systematic review of Level II to IV studies.