No abstract

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00091637.

Purpose  A degenerative meniscus lesion is a slowly developing process typically involving a horizontal cleavage in a middle-aged or older person. When the knee is symptomatic, arthroscopic partial meniscectomy has been practised for a long time with many case series reporting improved patient outcomes. Since 2002, several randomised clinical trials demonstrated no additional benefit of arthroscopic partial meniscectomy compared to non-operative treatment, sham surgery or sham arthroscopic partial meniscectomy. These results introduced controversy in the medical community and made clinical decision-making challenging in the daily clinical practice. To facilitate the clinical decision-making process, a consensus was developed. This initiative was endorsed by ESSKA. Methods  A degenerative meniscus lesion was defined as a lesion occurring without any history of significant acute trauma in a patient older than 35 years. Congenital lesions, traumatic meniscus tears and degenerative lesions occurring in young patients, especially in athletes, were excluded. The project followed the so-called formal consensus process, involving a steering group, a rating group and a peer-review group. A total of 84 surgeons and scientists from 22 European countries were included in the process. Twenty questions, their associated answers and an algorithm based on extensive literature review and clinical expertise, were proposed. Each question and answer set was graded according to the scientific level of the corresponding literature. Results  The main finding was that arthroscopic partial meniscectomy should not be proposed as a first line of treatment for degenerative meniscus lesions. Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy should only be considered after a proper standardised clinical and radiological evaluation and when the response to non-operative management has not been satisfactory. Magnetic resonance imaging of the knee is typically not indicated in the first-line work-up, but knee radiography should be used as an imaging tool to support a diagnosis of osteoarthritis or to detect certain rare pathologies, such as tumours or fractures of the knee. Discussion  The present work offers a clear framework for the management of degenerative meniscus lesions, with the aim to balance information extracted from the scientific evidence and clinical expertise. Because of biases and weaknesses of the current literature and lack of definition of important criteria such as mechanical symptoms, it cannot be considered as an exact treatment algorithm. It summarises the results of the “ESSKA Meniscus Consensus Project” ( ) and is the first official European consensus on this topic. The consensus may be updated and refined as more high-quality evidence emerges. Level of Evidence  I.

Background —Lanoteplase (nPA) is a rationally designed variant of tissue plasminogen activator with greater fibrinolytic potency and slower plasma clearance than alteplase. Methods and Results —InTIME (Intravenous nPA for Treatment of Infarcting Myocardium Early), a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, double-placebo angiographic trial, evaluated the dose-response relationship and safety of single-bolus, weight-adjusted lanoteplase. Patients (n=602) presenting within 6 hours of acute myocardial infarction were randomized and treated with either a single-bolus injection of lanoteplase (15, 30, 60, or 120 kU/kg) or accelerated alteplase. The primary objective was to determine TIMI grade flow at 60 minutes. Angiographic assessments were also performed at 90 minutes and on days 3 to 5. Follow-up was continued for 30 days. Lanoteplase achieved its primary objective, demonstrating a dose-response in TIMI grade 3 flow at 60 minutes (23.6% to 47.1% of subjects, P <0.001). Similar results were observed at 90 minutes (26.1% to 57.1%, P <0.001). At 90 minutes, coronary patency (TIMI 2 or 3) increased across the dose range up to 83% of subjects at 120 kU/kg lanoteplase compared with 71.4% with alteplase. Thus, at this dose, lanoteplase was superior to alteplase in restoring coronary patency (difference, 12%; 95% CI, 1% to 23%). The early safety experience in this study suggests that lanoteplase was well tolerated at all doses with safety comparable to that of alteplase. Conclusions —Lanoteplase, a single-bolus, weight-adjusted agent, increased coronary patency at 60 and 90 minutes in a dose-dependent fashion. Coronary patency at 90 minutes was achieved more frequently with 120 kU/kg lanoteplase than alteplase. In this study, safety with lanoteplase and alteplase was comparable. InTIME-II, a worldwide mortality trial, will evaluate efficacy and safety with this promising new agent.

IV, retrospective study.