While anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is readily offered to athletes, non-athletes are often treated conservatively. We carried out a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis study to compare the incidence of meniscal and cartilage injuries in an athlete and non-athlete population in relation to time of presentation since injury. The results were used to assess the need and relevance of ACL reconstruction in the non-athlete population. The study included 1375 patients who underwent ACL reconstruction between 1998 and 2004. These patients were initially broadly divided into two categories: athletes (575) and non-athletes (800). Each category was then sub-divided into four subgroups based on time elapsed between the injury and presentation at our clinic (Group A, 3 months; Group B, 3-12 months; Group C, 1-3 years; Group D, more than 3 years). Arthroscopic findings were documented for medial and lateral meniscus and cartilage injuries, and comparisons were made between the incidence of associated injuries in the corresponding groups. There was a statistically significant increase in the incidence of meniscal injuries and cartilage injuries after 1 year in both the groups. There was no difference in the incidence of meniscal and cartilage injuries in athletes and non-athletes among the corresponding groups. (chi-square test, p = 0.05). These results demonstrate that both athletes and non-athletes are equally susceptible for long-term meniscal and cartilage injuries if ACL reconstruction is not carried out early.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to evaluate the role of a handheld USG of 7-13 MHz in evaluating meniscal lesions of knee and comparing it to the results obtained with magnetic resonance imaging. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A comparative double blind study was done between ultrasonography and MRI of fifty patients with a history of knee trauma or with suspected knee meniscal lesions, who were referred to the department of Radiodiagnosis. MRI and USG results were finally correlated with arthroscopy findings. All these patients had a significant history and clinical evaluation suggested meniscal lesion of the knee joint. Cases which have been operated previously on the same knee were excluded from this study. RESULTS: Out of the 50 patients, a total of 100 menisci were examined, out of which after final arthroscopy confirmation, 34 had meniscal tears, 3 degenerative tears, and two patients had meniscal cysts both of which were not associated with a tear of the meniscus. CONCLUSION: The specificity of USG matched that of MRI and it can reasonably be applied to confirm the clinical diagnosis before undertaking arthroscopy. However, the lower sensitivity suggests that there is still a need to improve the technique to reduce the number of false-negative diagnoses and thus to avoid unnecessary arthroscopy. USG may be used as a screening tool prior to arthroscopy in selected cases where MRI is a contraindication or is not available or if the patient is not affording.