Absorbable versus non-absorbable suture materials in transtibial pull-out repair of medial meniscus posterior root tears: a systematic review and meta-analysis - 12/08/26

Doi : 10.1016/j.otsr.2026.104856

Joo Hyung Han ^a,^b, Sung-Hwan Kim ^a,^b, Min Jung ^a,^b, Chong-Hyuk Choi ^a,^c, Kwangho Chung ^a,^d, Se-Han Jung ^a,^b, Tae Hyun Kim ^a,^e, Hyun-Soo Moon ^a,^e,⁎

^a Arthroscopy and Joint Research Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea

^b Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea

^c Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Yonsei Bonsarang Hospital, Bucheon, Republic of Korea

^d Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Yongin Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Yongin, Republic of Korea

^e Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea

^⁎ Corresponding author.

Sous presse. Épreuves corrigées par l'auteur. Disponible en ligne depuis le Wednesday 12 August 2026

Abstract

Background

Transtibial pull-out repair is widely used for the treatment of medial meniscus posterior root tears (MMRTs). However, the optimal suture material remains unclear despite differences in biomechanical and biological properties between absorbable and non-absorbable sutures. This study aimed to evaluate whether suture material influences clinical and radiological outcomes after transtibial pull-out repair for MMRTs through a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies reporting clinical or radiological outcomes after transtibial pull-out repair for MMRTs were included. Extracted data included patient-reported outcomes, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based meniscal healing, meniscal extrusion, Kellgren–Lawrence (KL) grade progression, and conversion to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Random-effects meta-analyses and subgroup analyses were performed according to suture absorbability, and meta-regression was used to explore potential sources of heterogeneity.

Results

Sixteen studies encompassing 647 patients were included; these comprised one Level II study, seven Level III studies, and eight Level IV studies. No significant subgroup differences according to suture absorbability were identified for changes in International Knee Documentation Committee score (P = 0.07), Lysholm score (P = 0.43), meniscal extrusion (P = 0.19), MRI-based meniscal healing (P = 0.77), KL grade progression (P = 0.75), or conversion to TKA (P = 0.06). The pooled healing proportions were 0.60 (95% CI, 0.33–0.82) for non-absorbable sutures and 0.68 (95% CI, 0.00–1.00) for absorbable sutures. The corresponding pooled proportions of conversion to TKA were 0.05 (95% CI, 0.00–1.00) and 0.22 (95% CI, 0.10–0.38), respectively.

Conclusion

The available evidence did not identify statistically significant differences in clinical or radiological outcomes between absorbable and non-absorbable sutures after transtibial pull-out repair for MMRTs. However, because these findings were derived primarily from indirect comparisons across heterogeneous studies, they should not be interpreted as evidence of equivalence, and the current evidence remains insufficient to determine whether suture absorbability independently influences postoperative outcomes.