Objective. To determine the 5-year outcome of treatment for meniscal tear in osteoarthritis. Methods. We examined 5-year follow-up data from the Meniscal Tear in Osteoarthritis Research trial (METEOR) of physical therapy versus arthroscopic partial meniscectomy. We performed primary intent-to-treat (ITT) and secondary as-treated analyses. The primary outcome measure was the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) pain scale; total knee replacement (TKR) was a secondary outcome measure. We used piecewise linear mixed models to describe change in KOOS pain. We calculated 5-year cumulative TKR incidence and used a Cox model to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for TKR, with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).Results. Three hundred fifty-one participants were randomized. In the ITT analysis, the KOOS pain scores were ~46 (scale of 0 [no pain] to 100 [most pain]) at baseline in both groups. Pain scores improved substantially in both groups over the first 3 months, continued to improve through the next 24 months (to ~18 in each group), and were stable at 24-60 months. Results of the as-treated analyses of the KOOS pain score were similar. Twenty-five participants (7.1% [95% CI 4.4-9.8%]) underwent TKR over 5 years. In the ITT model, the HR for TKR was 2.0 (95% CI 0.8-4.9) for subjects randomized to the arthroscopic partial meniscectomy group, compared to those randomized to the physical therapy group. In the as-treated analysis, the HR for TKR was 4.9 (95% CI 1.1-20.9) for subjects ultimately treated with arthroscopic partial meniscectomy, compared to those treated nonoperatively.Conclusion. Pain improved considerably in both groups over 60 months. While ITT analysis revealed no statistically significant differences following TKR, greater frequency of TKR in those undergoing arthroscopic partial meniscectomy merits further study.

Background Decisions for operative or nonoperative management remain challenging for patients with spinal metastases, especially when life expectancy and quality of life are not easily predicted. This study evaluated the effects of operative and nonoperative management on maintenance of ambulatory function and survival for patients treated for spinal metastases. Methods Propensity matching was used to yield an analytic sample in which operatively and nonoperatively treated patients were similar with respect to key baseline covariates. The study included patients treated for spinal metastases between 2005 and 2017 who were 40 to 80 years old, were independent ambulators at presentation, and had fewer than 5 medical comorbidities. It evaluated the influence of operative care and nonoperative care on ambulatory function 6 months after presentation as the primary outcome. Survival at 6 months and survival at 1 year were secondary outcomes. Results Nine hundred twenty‐nine individuals eligible for inclusion were identified, with 402 (201 operative patients and 201 nonoperative patients) retained after propensity score matching. Patients treated operatively had a lower likelihood than those treated nonoperatively of being nonambulatory 6 months after presentation (3% vs 16%; relative risk [RR], 0.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.06‐0.46) as well as a reduced risk of 6‐month mortality (20% vs 29%; RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.49‐0.98). Conclusions These results indicate that in a group of patients with similar demographic and clinical characteristics, those treated operatively were less likely to lose ambulatory function 6 months after presentation than those managed nonoperatively. For patients with spinal metastases, our data can be incorporated into discussions about the treatments that align best with patients’ preferences regarding surgical risk, mortality, and ambulatory status.

No abstract