The Long-term Chondroprotective Effect of Meniscal Allograft Transplant: A 10- to 14-Year Follow-up Study

Background: The long-term chondroprotective effect of meniscal allograft transplant (MAT) and its superiority over meniscectomy have rarely been reported. Hypothesis: MAT would reduce osteoarthritis (OA) progression when compared with the meniscus-deficient knee. Graft extrusion distance would strongly affect the chondroprotective effect of the MAT. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A total of 17 knees receiving MAT were followed up as the MAT group. The MAT group was further divided into the nonextrusion subgroup (n = 9) and the extrusion subgroup (n = 8) according to 3-mm extrusion on the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) coronal section. A further 26 consecutive patients receiving meniscectomy in the same period were followed up as the ME group. The healthy control group consisted of healthy contralateral legs chosen from the MAT and ME groups (n = 27). Joint space width (JSW) narrowing was measured on radiographs. Three-dimensional MRI with a T2 mapping sequence was used to quantitatively analyze cartilage degeneration and meniscal allograft extrusion in 5 directions (0°, 45°, 90°, 135°, and 180°). The cartilage degeneration index (CDI) was calculated according to the size and degree of the chondral lesions on MRI scans. The correlation between the CDI increase and the extrusion distance was analyzed. Results: The mean follow-up time was 11.3 years (range, 10-14 years). The MAT group had moderate superiority in chondral protection with less JSW narrowing (0.58 ± 0.66 mm) and CDI increase (1132 ± 1589) compared with the ME group (JSW narrowing: 1.26 ± 1.13 mm, P = .025; CDI increase: 2182 ± 1958, P = .079). The JSW narrowing (0.71 ± 0.80 mm; P = .186) and CDI increase (2004 ± 1965; P = .830) of the extrusion subgroup were close to those of the ME group, demonstrating that a 3-mm extrusion led to complete loss of the meniscal chondroprotective effect. The nonextrusion group had significantly less JSW narrowing (0.48 ± 0.48 mm; P = .042) and CDI increase (358 ± 249; P = .011) than the ME group. The JSW narrowing of the healthy control group was 0.22 ± 0.27 mm. The cartilage T2 values of the extrusion subgroup were similar to those of the ME group, with more OA features, whereas the T2 values of the nonextrusion subgroup were closer to those of the healthy control group. The extrusion distance in the 90° direction ( P = .002) and the follow-up time ( P = .019) significantly affected the CDI increase in the multivariate regression model. The average extrusion distance in the 45°, 90°, and 135° directions better predicted chondroprotection compared with the other individual directions. Conclusion: MAT had moderate advantages in chondroprotection compared with meniscectomy in the long term. Graft extrusion distance strongly affected the chondroprotective effect of MAT. The chondroprotective effect of the nonextruded meniscal allograft was close to that of the native meniscus, whereas the allografts with an extrusion >3 mm completely lost their function after meniscectomy.