| Literature DB >> 20459700 |
Stephanie K Tanamas1, Andrew J Teichtahl, Anita E Wluka, Yuanyuan Wang, Miranda Davies-Tuck, Donna M Urquhart, Graeme Jones, Flavia M Cicuttini.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Whilst patellofemoral pain is one of the most common musculoskeletal disorders presenting to orthopaedic clinics, sports clinics, and general practices, factors contributing to its development in the absence of a defined arthropathy, such as osteoarthritis (OA), are unclear.The aim of this cross-sectional study was to describe the relationships between parameters of patellofemoral geometry (patella inclination, sulcus angle and patella height) and knee pain and patella cartilage volume.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20459700 PMCID: PMC2881017 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-11-87
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
Figure 1Medial and lateral patella cartilage volumes were determined by the software Osiris (University of Geneva, Switzerland). The patella ridge was used to divide the medial and lateral facets, which were then measured separately on each MRI by manually drawing disarticulation contours around each cartilage boundaries.
Figure 2Lateral condyle-patella angle, measured as the angle between the bony posterior femoral condyles (BC) and the bony lateral patella facet (AB).
Figure 3Sulcus angle defined as the angle formed between lines joining the highest points of the bony medial and lateral condyles and the lowest bony point of the intercondylar sulcus.
Figure 4Insall-Salvati ratio calculated as a ratio of tendon length (BC): patella length (AB) [22].
Demographic characteristics of the studied population
| N = 240 | |
|---|---|
| Age (years) | 45.7 (9.4) |
| Gender: n (% female) | 177 (73.8) |
| Weight (kg) | 94.3 (27.1) |
| Height (m) | 1.7 (0.1) |
| BMI (kg m-2) | 33.9 (9.6) |
| WOMAC pain score | 53.9 (82.7) |
| Patella bone volume (mm3) | 10966 (2580) |
| Patella cartilage volume (mm3) | 2213 (544) |
| LCPA (degrees) * | 19.0 (7.0) |
| SA (degrees) † | 150.8 (9.7) |
| I-S Ratio‡ | 1.0 (0.1) |
Presented as mean (SD) unless otherwise stated; BMI = Body Mass Index, WOMAC = Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index, LCPA = lateral condyle-patella angle, SA = sulcus angle, I-S Ratio = Insall-Salvati Ratio
* measured in 233 subjects
† measured in 226 subjects
‡ measured in 222 subjects
Relationship between patella inclination, sulcus angle and patella height and Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score
| Univariate Analysis | Multivariate Analysis* | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regression coefficient | P value | Regression coefficient | P value | |
| LCPA | -1.74 (-3.27, -0.21) | 0.03 | -1.57 (-3.05, -0.09) | 0.04 |
| SA | 0.25 (-0.85, 1.34) | 0.66 | 0.04 (-1.02, 1.09) | 0.95 |
| I-S ratio | 57.26 (-13.23, 127.74) | 0.11 | 33.01 (-36.83, 102.85) | 0.35 |
LCPA = lateral condyle-patella angle, SA = sulcus angle, I-S Ratio = Insall-Salvati Ratio, CI = Confidence Interval
*adjusted for age, gender, BMI, patella cartilage volume and bone size
Relationship between parameters of patellofemoral geometry and WOMAC pain and patella cartilage volume: the difference between obese and non-obese subjects
| Obese subgroup | Non-obese subgroup | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regression coefficient | P value | Regression coefficient | P value | P value for difference† | |
| LCPA | -3.13 | 0.01 | 0.56 | 0.36 | 0.01 |
| SA | 0.42 | 0.66 | -0.1 | 0.98 | 0.68 |
| I-S ratio | 87.80 | 0.15 | -37.58 | 0.25 | 0.06 |
| LCPA | 86.36 | 0.01 | 47.81 | 0.18 | 0.41 |
| SA | 12.01 | 0.62 | -55.61 | 0.03 | 0.05 |
| I-S ratio | -3093.84 | 0.06 | -2943.85 | 0.10 | 0.95 |
| LCPA | 49.36 | 0.22 | 48.77 | 0.34 | 0.99 |
| SA | 53.63 | 0.08 | 31.12 | 0.41 | 0.64 |
| I-S ratio | -3594.17 | 0.07 | -2433.12 | 0.37 | 0.73 |
LCPA = lateral condyle-patella angle, SA = sulcus angle, I-S Ratio = Insall-Salvati Ratio, CI = Confidence Interval
*adjusted for age, gender, BMI, patella cartilage volume and bone size
†p value calculated using independent samples z-test for difference between subgroups
Relationship between patella inclination, sulcus angle and patella height and patella cartilage volume
| Univariate Analysis | Multivariate Analysis* | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regression coefficient | P value | Regression coefficient | P value | |
| LCPA | 40.34 (-18.30, 98.98) | 0.18 | 67.23 (22.10, 112.36) | 0.004 |
| SA | -23.83 (-66.34, 18.68) | 0.27 | -23.63 (-56.89, 9.63) | 0.16 |
| I-S ratio | -3213.15 (-6140.70, 285.60) | 0.03 | -3186.89 (-5510.01, -863.77) | 0.01 |
| LCPA | 16.90 (-66.20, 100.01) | 0.69 | 48.88 (-12.34, 110.11) | 0.12 |
| SA | 41.08 (-20.33, 102.49) | 0.19 | 43.27 (-2.43, 88.98) | 0.06 |
| I-S ratio | -3390.01 (-7598.65, 818.63) | 0.11 | -2826.33 (-5985.73, 333.07) | 0.08 |
LCPA = lateral condyle-patella angle, SA = sulcus angle, I-S Ratio = Insall-Salvati Ratio, CI = Confidence Interval
*adjusted for age, gender, BMI, patella cartilage volume and bone size