Literature DB >> 26283233

Patellofemoral Pressure Changes After Static and Dynamic Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstructions.

Akkie Rood1, Gerjon Hannink2, Anke Lenting3, Karlijn Groenen2, Sander Koëter4, Nico Verdonschot5, Albert van Kampen3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Reconstructing the medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) has become a key procedure for stabilizing the patella. Different techniques to reconstruct the MPFL have been described: static techniques in which the graft is fixed rigidly to the bone or dynamic techniques with soft tissue fixation. Static MPFL reconstruction is most commonly used. However, dynamic reconstruction deforms more easily and presumably functions more like the native MPFL. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of the different MPFL fixation techniques on patellofemoral pressures compared with the native situation. The hypothesis was that dynamic reconstruction would result in patellofemoral pressures closer to those generated in an intact knee. STUDY
DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study.
METHODS: Seven fresh-frozen knee specimens were tested in an in vitro knee joint loading apparatus. Tekscan pressure-sensitive films fixed to the retropatellar cartilage measured mean patellofemoral and peak pressures, contact area, and location of the center of force (COF) at fixed flexion angles from 0° to 110°. Four different conditions were tested: intact, dynamic, partial dynamic, and static MPFL reconstruction. Data were analyzed using linear mixed models.
RESULTS: Static MPFL reconstruction resulted in higher peak and mean pressures from 60° to 110° of flexion (P < .001). There were no differences in pressure between the 2 different dynamic reconstructions and the intact situation (P > .05). The COF in the static reconstruction group moved more medially on the patella from 50° to 110° of flexion compared with the other conditions. The contact area showed no significant differences between the test conditions.
CONCLUSION: After static MPFL reconstruction, the patellofemoral pressures in flexion angles from 60° to 110° were 3 to 5 times higher than those in the intact situation. The pressures after dynamic MPFL reconstruction were similar as compared with those in the intact situation, and therefore, dynamic MPFL reconstruction could be a safer option than static reconstruction for stabilizing the patella. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study showed that static MPFL reconstruction results in higher patellofemoral pressures and thus enhances the chance of osteoarthritis in the long term, while dynamic reconstruction results in more normal pressures.
© 2015 The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  MPFL reconstruction; medial patellofemoral ligament; patella; patellofemoral pressure; trochlea

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26283233     DOI: 10.1177/0363546515594447

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


  12 in total

1.  Morphology of insertion sites on patellar side of medial patellofemoral ligament.

Authors:  Shuhei Kikuchi; Goro Tajima; Jun Yan; Youichi Kamei; Moritaka Maruyama; Atsushi Sugawara; Kotaro Fujino; Sanjuro Takeda; Minoru Doita
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-01-07       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Complications of medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction using two transverse patellar tunnels.

Authors:  Loes Schiphouwer; Akkie Rood; Siebren Tigchelaar; Sander Koëter
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-07-12       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 3.  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

4.  Dynamic versus static medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction technique in the treatment of recurrent patellar dislocation: a randomized clinical trial protocol.

Authors:  Anna Bartsch; Corina Nüesch; Bertram Rieger; Annegret Mündermann; Christian Egloff
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2022-07-10       Impact factor: 2.677

5.  Intraarticular arthrofibrosis of the knee alters patellofemoral contact biomechanics.

Authors:  Jacob D Mikula; Erik L Slette; Kimi D Dahl; Scott R Montgomery; Grant J Dornan; Luke O'Brien; Travis Lee Turnbull; Thomas R Hackett
Journal:  J Exp Orthop       Date:  2017-12-19

6.  Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction Femoral Tunnel Accuracy: Relationship to Disease-Specific Quality of Life.

Authors:  Laurie A Hiemstra; Sarah Kerslake; Mark Lafave
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2017-02-07

7.  Impact of five different medial patellofemoral ligament-reconstruction strategies and three different graft pre-tensioning states on the mean patellofemoral contact pressure: a biomechanical study on human cadaver knees.

Authors:  Daniel Dornacher; Sabine Lippacher; Manfred Nelitz; Heiko Reichel; Anita Ignatius; Lutz Dürselen; Andreas Martin Seitz
Journal:  J Exp Orthop       Date:  2018-06-28

8.  Dynamic-Anatomical Reconstruction of Medial Patellofemoral Ligament in Open Physis.

Authors:  Roberto Negrín; Nicolas O Reyes; Magaly Iñiguez; Nicolas Gaggero; Rodrigo Sandoval; Nicolas Jabes; Magdalena Mendez
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2020-06-25

9.  Comparison of Clinical and Radiological Outcomes Between Transosseous Tunnel and Suture Anchor Patellar Fixation for Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction: A Cohort Study With 2-Year Follow-up.

Authors:  Kyoung Ho Yoon; Eung Ju Kim; Yoo Beom Kwon; In Uk Hwang; Sang-Gyun Kim
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2020-05-05

10.  The peripheral soft tissues should not be ignored in the finite element models of the human knee joint.

Authors:  Hamid Naghibi Beidokhti; Dennis Janssen; Sebastiaan van de Groes; Nico Verdonschot
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2017-12-07       Impact factor: 2.602

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.