2.1 μm Holmium:YAG Arthroscopic Laser Débridement of Degenerative Knees: 148 Cases

  • Pekka Mooar


Laser energy has been shown to have biologic effects on articular cartilage (Schultz et al., 1985). It has been demonstrated with several wavelengths that it can be used for arthroscopic applications. It has precision in cutting, making it attractive for the management of articular flap tears. Laser energy appears to preserve more remaining articular cartilage than do mechanical shavers. The combination of cartilage sparing and biostimulation offer theoretic improvements over mechanical instrumentation. The 2.1 μm holmium:YAG laser has the added advantage of versatility and has been my arthroscopic instrument of choice for performing combined partial meniscectomy and chondroplasty in degenerative knees.


Articular Cartilage Laser Energy Mechanical Debridement Chondral Surface Degenerative Knee 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Collier MA, Bellamy T, Hangland LM, et al (1993) Initial effects of holmium:YAG laser on equine cartilage adjacent to traumatic lesion: a histopathological assessment. Trans Vet Orthop Res Soc 22:5Google Scholar
  2. Garrick JG (1992) CO2 laser arthroscopy using ambient gas pressure. Semin Orthop 7(2):90–94Google Scholar
  3. Glick J (1984) Use of the laser beam in arthroscopic surgery. In Casscells SE (ed), Arthroscopy: Diagnostic and Surgical Practice. Lea & Febiger, Philadelphia p 181Google Scholar
  4. Inoue K, et al (1984) Arthroscopic Laser Surgery. IAA, London, pp 29–30.9Google Scholar
  5. Johnson LL (1986) Arthroscopic abrasion arthroplasty historical and pathological perspective: present states. Arthroscopy 2:54–69PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Lane G, Sherk HH, Mooar PA, Lee SJ, Black J (1992) Holmium:yttrium-aluminum-garnet laser versus carbon dioxide laser versus mechanical arthroscopic debridement. Semin Orthop 7(2):95–101Google Scholar
  7. Livesley PJ, Doherty M, Needoff M, Moulton A (1991) Arthroscopic lavage of osteoarthritic knees. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 73:922–926Google Scholar
  8. Mankin HJ (1974a) The reaction of articular cartilage to injury and osteoarthritis: part I. N Engl J Med 291:1285–1292PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mankin H J (1974b) The reaction of articular cartilage to injury and osteoarthritis: part II. N Engl J Med 291:1335–1340PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Rand JA (1985) Arthroscopic management of degenerative meniscus tears in patients with degenerative arthritis. Arthroscopy 1:253PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rand JA (1991) Role of arthroscopy in osteoarthritis of the knee. Arthroscopy 7:358–363PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Schultz RJ, Krishnamurthy S, Thelmo W, et al (1985) Effects of varying intensities of laser energy on articular cartilage: a preliminary study. Lasers Surg Med 5:577–588PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Trauner K, Nishioka N, Patel D (1990) Pulsed holmium:YAG (Ho:YAG) laser ablation of fibrocartilage and articular cartilage. Am J Sports Med 18:316–320PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Vangsness Jr CT, Smith CF, Marshall GJ, Sweeny JR, Johansen E (1992) CO2 laser vaporization of articular cartilage. Semin Orthop 7(2)83–85Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pekka Mooar

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations