Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Arthroscopic surgery for knee pain: a highly questionable practice without supporting evidence of even moderate quality
  1. Teppo L N Järvinen1,
  2. Gordon H Guyatt2
  1. 1Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
  2. 2Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
  1. Correspondence to T L N Järvinen, teppo.jarvinen{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

With 150 000 knee arthroscopies carried out in the United Kingdom each year, and about five times that number in the United States,1 ,2 arthroscopic partial meniscectomy—keyhole surgery for middle aged to older adults with knee pain to trim a torn meniscus—is one of the most common surgical procedures. Considering the enormous volume, it is natural to think that there is compelling evidence for the procedure being beneficial. Remarkably, this is not so.

It is barely a decade since the publication of the first controlled trial addressing knee arthroscopy using placebo surgery as a comparator.3 Since then a series of rigorous trials, summarised in two recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses, provide compelling evidence that arthroscopic knee surgery offers little benefit for most patients with knee pain.4 ,5 The latest nail into what should be …

View Full Text


  • Competing interests We have read and understood the BMJ policy on declaration of interests and declare: none.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; not peer reviewed.

Linked Articles