IntroductionMeniscal tears represent one of the most frequent knee injuries and are the most common cause of knee surgery. Historically, age has been considered an independent factor contraindicating meniscal repair due to the assumption that meniscal injuries in this population are frequently chronic tears, mostly with a degenerative tear pattern, and low healing potential. However, recent literature has questioned this paradigm with studies reporting successful outcomes with meniscal repair in older patients. Our study aimed to evaluate and compare the short-term clinical outcomes of meniscal repair versus partial meniscectomy in patients aged ≥40 years old. MethodsA retrospective study was conducted that included patients over the age of 40 years, diagnosed with meniscal tears, that underwent arthroscopically assisted meniscal repair or partial meniscectomy between 01 January and 31 December 2020. The patients were divided into two groups: Group 1-partial meniscectomy (PM) and Group 2-meniscal repair (MR). The clinical evaluation was performed 24 months after the surgery, and the studied variables were: function (Tegner Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale), pain (Visual Analogue Scale), patient satisfaction, and failure rate. ResultsFifty-one patients met the inclusion criteria, and 7 were excluded due to loss of follow-up during telephone contact. Thus, the final sample consisted of 44 patients (mean age 52.18y), both groups with 22 patients. In both groups, we found an improvement in pain 2 years after the surgery, with a decrease in the VAS value between the pre and post-surgery. On average, the VAS score decreased from 7.9 to 4.5 in the group subjected to partial meniscectomy, and from 7.5 to 3.2 in the meniscal repair. This was statistically significant in both groups, with a p-value <0.01, but not between them (p-value = 0.363). Comparing the degree of satisfaction between both groups, we found no statistically significant difference between them (p=0.167). Regarding the functional outcome (Tegner Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale), the group that underwent the meniscal repair obtained a statistically superior score compared to the partial meniscectomy group (77.55 vs. 64.77; p-value 0.033). The failure rate was exactly equal in both groups (4.5%), therefore no statistically significant difference was found in this variable. ConclusionAge, as an independent factor, should not be considered a contraindication for meniscus repair. In fact, if technically possible, meniscal repair should always be performed as it is associated with better functional outcomes, similar failure rates, and may be protective against the development and progression of arthritis.

No abstract

No abstract

Brazil and South Africa have long been regarded archetypical regional powers, commanding more resources than their neighbours, spearheading regional projects and pursuing highprofile global status. Yet, recent years have also evidenced how the engagement with their regions and acceptance as leading players is often ambiguous and incomplete. How does one ascertain that a regional power privileges either the regional or the global stage? Through an original dataset of Brazilian and South African output at the UN General Assembly between 1994 and 2013, we monitor sponsorship patterns and thematic preferences in order to verify whether these countries indulged their regional partners and topics. Our findings suggest that Brazil and South Africa favoured their immediate neighbourhoods, but have gradually engaged their regions in different ways: while Brazilian emphasis on regional peers and themes declined over the years, South Africa developed an increasingly more regionalised UNGA agenda. Table 1: Brazil's most frequent co-sponsors, per session/year Session (Year) Brazil's top 5 most frequent co-sponsors S.49 (1994)

No abstract