Partial Meniscectomy or Physical Therapy in Degenerative Meniscus Tears: A Retrospective Cohort Study with 2-Year Follow-Up.

Abstract

Degenerative meniscal injuries are a common occurrence in orthopedic practice. However, there is currently no consensus regarding the optimal treatment algorithm and the efficacy of different treatment modalities. Therefore, this study aimed to analyze the clinical reflections of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy (APM) and physical therapy (PT) methods, as well as the potential development of osteoarthritis (OA) following treatment. The study group comprised patients diagnosed with degenerative meniscal tears who were treated with either conservative or APM methods at a center between March 2021 and January 2022. The radiographs of these patients prior to the commencement of treatment were classified according to the Kelgren-Lawrence system, and clinical and pain scores were recorded. Following a 2-year period of treatment, the radiographs and scores at the conclusion of the third, 12th, and 24th months were analyzed. Among 213 patients followed up with a diagnosis of degenerative meniscal damage, at the 3-month follow-up, the APM group demonstrated significantly better pain relief and functional outcomes compared with the PT group, with notable improvements in WOMAC (between score difference: -15.96; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -17.08 to -14.83), Lysholm (23.43; 95% CI: 22.15-24.71), and VAS (-6.98; 95% CI: -7.25 to -6.71) scores (p < 0.001). However, by the 12th and 24th months, both groups showed comparable long-term improvements. Radiographic assessments over 2 years revealed no significant differences in OA progression. These findings suggest that APM provides superior short-term benefits, but both APM and PT are equally effective in the long-term management of degenerative meniscus tears. A comparison of the APM and PT groups revealed that patients under 50 years of age who underwent APM demonstrated superior outcomes in terms of pain and functional scores at the 3-month follow-up. At the 2-year mark, the efficacy of the treatment methods was established, yet no significant differences were observed in their capacity to prevent OA.The level of evidence is III.