To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Partial meniscectomy vs conservative therapy for nonobstructive meniscal tears

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
January 2017

Partial meniscectomy vs conservative therapy for nonobstructive meniscal tears

Vol: 6| Issue: 1| Number:49| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Meta-analysis/Systematic Review
OE Level Evidence:1
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

Arthroscopic Partial Meniscectomy or Conservative Treatment for Nonobstructive Meniscal Tears: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Arthroscopy. 2016 Sep;32(9):1855-1865

Contributing Authors:
VA van de Graaf N Wolterbeek EL Mutsaerts VA Scholtes DB Saris A de Gast RW Poolman

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

5 randomized controlled trials were included in this meta-analysis to compare arthroscopic partial meniscectomy to conservative treatment for the management of nonobstructive meniscal tears. Data from included studies was pooled for physical function outcomes, pain, and activity level over multiple time points up to 24-month follow-up. The results from this meta-analysis demonstrated small but sig...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue