Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2025 Jun;53(7):1750-1760.
doi: 10.1177/03635465241295709. Epub 2025 Jan 22.

A Lack of Joint Line Tenderness Is Consistent With a Healed Meniscus, But Positive Clinical Examination Findings and MRI Scans Are Inconsistent in Identifying Failure After Meniscal Repair: A Systematic Review and Subgroup Meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

A Lack of Joint Line Tenderness Is Consistent With a Healed Meniscus, But Positive Clinical Examination Findings and MRI Scans Are Inconsistent in Identifying Failure After Meniscal Repair: A Systematic Review and Subgroup Meta-analysis

Jon H Schoenecker et al. Am J Sports Med. 2025 Jun.

Abstract

Background: The number of meniscal repairs being completed each year is increasing; however, the optimal, cost-effective postoperative assessment to determine the success or failure of a meniscal repair is not well known.

Purpose/hypothesis: The purpose of this systematic review was to identify the clinical examination testing that correlates with objective magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or second-look arthroscopy (SLA) findings to determine an optimal clinical workup for assessing postoperative meniscal repair healing. It was hypothesized that specific clinical tests would correlate with meniscal repairs that did not heal.

Study design: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods: This systematic review included all clinical studies investigating meniscal repairs, meniscal repair outcomes, and meniscal healing with clinical findings, MRI, and/or SLA, published in a peer-reviewed journal and with full English text available. All included studies were evaluated for bias using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS). The clinical tests included those using "Barrett's criteria," with the assessment of effusion, joint line tenderness, locking, McMurray testing, and radiographs. This parameter has also been abbreviated to "modified Barrett's criteria" to include only joint line tenderness, effusion, and McMurray testing.

Results: No significant correlations were found between clinical tests and MRI or SLA. A subgroup meta-analysis between Barrett's and non-Barrett's studies reported no significant subgroup differences (χ12 = 0.24; P = .62). A meta-analysis of diagnostic accuracy using a group of 7 studies that reported on true-positive, true-negative, false-positive, and false-negative data for SLA demonstrated that only a lack of joint line tenderness had a high specificity for a healed meniscal repair, with a log diagnostic odds ratio of 2.62 (95% CI, 0.47-4.76).

Conclusion: This study found no significant correlation with any specific clinical test for meniscal repair healing status using postoperative MRI and/or SLA findings. However, it was found that no healing (when compared with complete or incomplete healing) on MRI and joint line tenderness should be considered when assessing the status of postoperative meniscal repair healing. In addition, a subgroup meta-analysis found that a lack of joint line tenderness was highly correlated with a healed meniscal repair.

Keywords: joint line tenderness; knee, general; knee, meniscus; magnetic resonance images; meniscal repair; second-look arthroscopy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflict of interest or source of funding: N.I.K. has received consulting fees from Vericel, research support from Arthrex, support for education from Foundation Medical and Smith & Nephew, and hospitality payments from Encore Medical and Zimmer Biomet Holdings. R.F.L. has received consulting fees from Ossur, Smith & Nephew, and Responsive Arthroscopy; royalties from Ossur, Smith & Nephew, Elsevier, and Arthrex; research support from Ossur and Smith & Nephew; and support for education from Foundation Medical. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto.

Similar articles

Cited by

LinkOut - more resources