Global Variability in Discoid Meniscus Management: A Comparative Study of Pediatric Research in Sports Medicine Asia‐Pacific and the Surgical Cohort Outcome Registry Experience Registry
4 affiliations
- 1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery National University Health System Singapore Singapore
- 2Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine Singapore Singapore
- 3Department of Orthopaedic Surgery UT Southwestern Medical Center Dallas Texas U.S.A.
- 4Department of Pediatric Orthopaedics Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University Shenyang Liaoning Province China
Abstract
Purpose: To compare diagnostic emphasis and surgical management strategies for discoid meniscus (DM) between Asia‐Pacific surgeons participating in the Pediatric Research in Sports Medicine collaborative and North American surgeons within the Surgical Cohort Outcome Registry Experience registry.
Methods: Between January and July 2024, a cross‐sectional survey was conducted among fellowship‐trained pediatric and sports orthopaedic surgeons in the Pediatric Research in Sports Medicine Asia‐Pacific collaborative. Surgeons with active clinical experience managing DM were invited to participate, and all 54 completed the survey (response rate 100%). These responses were compared with data from 26 North American surgeons participating in the Surgical Cohort Outcome Registry Experience. Variables, including meniscal morphology, tear patterns, instability location, and surgical management strategies, were harmonized between datasets and compared using χ 2 or Fisher's exact tests.
Results: A total of 54 Asia‐Pacific surgeons and 26 North American surgeons were included. Complete discoid morphology was more commonly reported in North America (57.6% vs 49.0%), whereas incomplete morphology predominated in Asia‐Pacific (51.4% vs 42.4%). Horizontal or cleavage tears were more frequent in Asia‐Pacific (45.6% vs 20.7%, P = .036). Saucerization was the predominant treatment in both regions (94.3% vs 93.7%). Meniscal repair was reported more frequently in Asia‐Pacific (71.4% vs 54.6%), particularly for intrasubstance tears (82.5% vs 24.3%) and rim instability (65.8% vs 8.8%). Among patients aged ≥14 years, repair rates remained higher in Asia‐Pacific (74.8% vs 44.1%, P = .012).
Conclusions: Saucerization was the predominant surgical treatment for DM in both Asia‐Pacific and North American cohorts. Regional differences were observed in tear characterization, instability localization, and repair thresholds. These findings show variation in clinical practice patterns despite a shared emphasis on meniscal preservation.
Clinical Relevance: Understanding regional variation in DM diagnosis and management may help improve the recognition of tear patterns and instability across populations. Although saucerization remains the cornerstone of treatment globally, differences in tear characterization and repair thresholds highlight the need for standardized classification systems and internationally aligned treatment strategies to optimize meniscal preservation.
Related
- Lateral-Only Flexible Intramedullary Nailing for Pediatric Tibial Shaft Fractures: An Early Comparative Experience With a Novel Technique to Reduce Symptomatic Implant Prominence
- Clinical Management of Pediatric Hemosuccus Pancreaticus: Experience Based on a Case Report and Mini Literature Review
- Combined Management of Meniscus Root Tear and High Tibial Osteotomy: A Surgical Strategy Using 3‐Dimensional Printing
- Lateral-Only Flexible Intramedullary Nailing for Pediatric Tibial Shaft Fractures: An Early Comparative Experience With a Novel Technique to Reduce Symptomatic Implant Prominence
- Patient and alignment factors associated with the occurrence and subtype differentiation of degenerative medial meniscus tears: a weighted comparative analysis.
BibTeX
@article{hui2026global,
title = {{Global Variability in Discoid Meniscus Management: A Comparative Study of Pediatric Research in Sports Medicine Asia‐Pacific and the Surgical Cohort Outcome Registry Experience Registry}},
author = {Si Jian Hui and Khim Yew Chew and Jacqueline Jin Li Liew and Ryan Wai Keong Loke and Henry Ellis and Qi‐Wei Lee and James Hoi Po Hui},
journal = {Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1002/ars2.70155},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13720861},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Global Variability in Discoid Meniscus Management: A Comparative Study of Pediatric Research in Sports Medicine Asia‐Pacific and the Surgical Cohort Outcome Registry Experience Registry
AU - Si Jian Hui
AU - Khim Yew Chew
AU - Jacqueline Jin Li Liew
AU - Ryan Wai Keong Loke
AU - Henry Ellis
AU - Qi‐Wei Lee
AU - James Hoi Po Hui
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/30
JO - Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation
DO - 10.1002/ars2.70155
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/PMC13720861
AB - Purpose: To compare diagnostic emphasis and surgical management strategies for discoid meniscus (DM) between Asia‐Pacific surgeons participating in the Pediatric Research in Sports Medicine collaborative and North American surgeons within the Surgical Cohort Outcome Registry Experience registry. Methods: Between January and July 2024, a cross‐sectional survey was conducted among fellowship‐trained pediatric and sports orthopaedic surgeons in the Pediatric Research in Sports Medicine Asia‐Pacific collaborative. Surgeons with active clinical experience managing DM were invited to participate, and all 54 completed the survey (response rate 100%). These responses were compared with data from 26 North American surgeons participating in the Surgical Cohort Outcome Registry Experience. Variables, including meniscal morphology, tear patterns, instability location, and surgical management strategies, were harmonized between datasets and compared using χ 2 or Fisher's exact tests. Results: A total of 54 Asia‐Pacific surgeons and 26 North American surgeons were included. Complete discoid morphology was more commonly reported in North America (57.6% vs 49.0%), whereas incomplete morphology predominated in Asia‐Pacific (51.4% vs 42.4%). Horizontal or cleavage tears were more frequent in Asia‐Pacific (45.6% vs 20.7%, P = .036). Saucerization was the predominant treatment in both regions (94.3% vs 93.7%). Meniscal repair was reported more frequently in Asia‐Pacific (71.4% vs 54.6%), particularly for intrasubstance tears (82.5% vs 24.3%) and rim instability (65.8% vs 8.8%). Among patients aged ≥14 years, repair rates remained higher in Asia‐Pacific (74.8% vs 44.1%, P = .012). Conclusions: Saucerization was the predominant surgical treatment for DM in both Asia‐Pacific and North American cohorts. Regional differences were observed in tear characterization, instability localization, and repair thresholds. These findings show variation in clinical practice patterns despite a shared emphasis on meniscal preservation. Clinical Relevance: Understanding regional variation in DM diagnosis and management may help improve the recognition of tear patterns and instability across populations. Although saucerization remains the cornerstone of treatment globally, differences in tear characterization and repair thresholds highlight the need for standardized classification systems and internationally aligned treatment strategies to optimize meniscal preservation.
SN - 2666-061X
ER -