Literature DB >> 18296543

Patellofemoral contact area and pressure after medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction.

Todd M Melegari1, Brent G Parks, Leslie S Matthews.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It is not known whether nonisometric femoral graft attachment diminishes the effectiveness of medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction.
PURPOSE: To determine whether a nonisometric femoral attachment point is associated with differences in contact area and pressure in the patellofemoral joint as compared with an isometric attachment point. STUDY
DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study.
METHODS: Eleven cadaveric knees were amputated and secured in a loading fixture. The quadriceps tendon was clamped 5 cm above the proximal pole of the patella and fixed to a plate. Colinear compressive forces were applied. Forces were set to achieve isometric quadriceps moments at 30 degrees, 45 degrees, 60 degrees, and 90 degrees of knee flexion. Contact areas and pressures were measured using a sensor system. Initially, isometric reconstruction was done using the known isometric femoral attachment point of the posterior medial epicondyle. The attachment was then revised in each specimen to the known nonisometric femoral attachment of the adductor tubercle.
RESULTS: Before medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction, average facet patellofemoral contact area and pressure generally increased with angle of knee flexion. With few exceptions, initial versus postprocedure data and isometric versus nonisometric contact area and pressure data did not differ significantly at any angle tested. Percentage contact area and contact pressure in the medial facet did not differ significantly from the initial percentage for either attachment, and no difference was found in the percentage medial contact area or pressure for isometric versus nonisometric attachment at the angles tested.
CONCLUSION: Use of the nonisometric attachment point of the adductor tubercle in medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction did not appear to alter knee contact area or contact pressures as compared with isometric femoral attachment at the posterior medial epicondyle. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction, patellofemoral contact area and pressure may not be adversely affected by use of the nonisometric femoral attachment point used in this study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18296543     DOI: 10.1177/0363546508314410

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Sports Med        ISSN: 0363-5465            Impact factor:   6.202


  18 in total

1.  A Finite Element Analysis of Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction.

Authors:  Nicole A DeVries Watson; Kyle R Duchman; Matthew J Bollier; Nicole M Grosland
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2015

2.  A mini-invasive adductor magnus tendon transfer technique for medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction: a technical note.

Authors:  Petri J Sillanpää; Heikki M Mäenpää; Ville M Mattila; Tuomo Visuri; Harri Pihlajamäki
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2009-01-23       Impact factor: 4.342

3.  Effects of medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction on patellar tracking.

Authors:  Keisuke Kita; Shuji Horibe; Yukiyoshi Toritsuka; Norimasa Nakamura; Yoshinari Tanaka; Yasukazu Yonetani; Tatsuo Mae; Ken Nakata; Hideki Yoshikawa; Konsei Shino
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-07-15       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Fluoroscopic control allows for precise tunnel positioning in MPFL reconstruction.

Authors:  Vera Jaecker; Benedikt Brozat; Marc Banerjee; Robin Otchwemah; Bertil Bouillon; Sven Shafizadeh
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-05-10       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  Graft length change and radiographic assessment of femoral drill hole position for medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction.

Authors:  Tomohiko Tateishi; Masamitsu Tsuchiya; Naoya Motosugi; Shintaro Asahina; Hiroo Ikeda; Sadahiro Cho; Takeshi Muneta
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2010-09-01       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Effective patellofemoral joint stabilization and low complication rates using a hardware-free MPFL reconstruction technique with an intra-operative adjustment of the graft tension.

Authors:  Lars V von Engelhardt; Torsten Fuchs; Pia Weskamp; Joerg Jerosch
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-09-20       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  The relation of the distal femoral physis and the medial patellofemoral ligament.

Authors:  M Nelitz; D Dornacher; J Dreyhaupt; H Reichel; S Lippacher
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-05-19       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 8.  Biomechanical Analysis of Tibial Tuberosity Medialization and Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction.

Authors:  John J Elias; Bradley W Smith; Blake T Daney
Journal:  Sports Med Arthrosc Rev       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 1.985

9.  Finite Element Analysis of Patella Alta: A Patellofemoral Instability Model.

Authors:  Nicole A Watson; Kyle R Duchman; Nicole M Grosland; Matthew J Bollier
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2017

10.  Clinical and radiological outcomes after a quasi-anatomical reconstruction of medial patellofemoral ligament with gracilis tendon autograft.

Authors:  Joan C Monllau; Àngel Masferrer-Pino; Gerard Ginovart; Daniel Pérez-Prieto; Pablo E Gelber; Vicente Sanchis-Alfonso
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-12-24       Impact factor: 4.342

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.