Thomas Tischer1, Andreas Geier2, Robert Lenz2, Christoph Woernle3, Rainer Bader2. 1. Department of Orthopaedics, University of Rostock, Doberaner Strasse 142, 18057, Rostock, Germany. thomas.tischer@med.uni-rostock.de. 2. Department of Orthopaedics, University of Rostock, Doberaner Strasse 142, 18057, Rostock, Germany. 3. Chair of Technical Dynamics, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction is a key procedure for treating patellofemoral instability. However, controversy exists regarding the correct graft placement in different patellar heights. Therefore, our study aimed to investigate the influence of patellar height on MPFL insertion points. METHODS: Strain patterns of the reconstructed MPFL were calculated using a dynamic musculoskeletal multibody simulation. Numerous patellar (proximal, central, distal) and femoral attachment sites (around the radiological point according to Schöttle) were analysed in the presence of different patella heights [Insall-Salvati (IS) indices 0.74, 1.0, 1.5] during dynamic knee flexion from 0° to 120°. RESULTS: The reconstructed MPFL showed an almost isometric behaviour at the anatomic insertion (IS 1.0). Slight variation (<5 mm) around the ideal femoral insertion point resulted in only small changes in MPFL tension. However, a displacement of 10 mm led to a significant increase in MPFL tension, especially in the more anteriorly/proximally located femoral attachment points. Depending on the patella height, there exists an area of absolute isometry of the MPFL (length change <3 %) on the femoral condyle, which did not necessarily coincide exactly with the radiological point, but was located within a radius of 5 mm around it. CONCLUSIONS: When reconstructed in the radiological femoral insertion point, MPFL strain patterns were only slightly affected by different patella heights (IS 0.74-1.5) suggesting that MPFL reconstruction could be safely performed using the radiological insertion. However, in case of a patella alta (IS 1.5), a slightly more proximal femoral insertion is beneficial for the biomechanical behaviour of the reconstructed MPFL.
PURPOSE: Medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction is a key procedure for treating patellofemoral instability. However, controversy exists regarding the correct graft placement in different patellar heights. Therefore, our study aimed to investigate the influence of patellar height on MPFL insertion points. METHODS: Strain patterns of the reconstructed MPFL were calculated using a dynamic musculoskeletal multibody simulation. Numerous patellar (proximal, central, distal) and femoral attachment sites (around the radiological point according to Schöttle) were analysed in the presence of different patella heights [Insall-Salvati (IS) indices 0.74, 1.0, 1.5] during dynamic knee flexion from 0° to 120°. RESULTS: The reconstructed MPFL showed an almost isometric behaviour at the anatomic insertion (IS 1.0). Slight variation (<5 mm) around the ideal femoral insertion point resulted in only small changes in MPFL tension. However, a displacement of 10 mm led to a significant increase in MPFL tension, especially in the more anteriorly/proximally located femoral attachment points. Depending on the patella height, there exists an area of absolute isometry of the MPFL (length change <3 %) on the femoral condyle, which did not necessarily coincide exactly with the radiological point, but was located within a radius of 5 mm around it. CONCLUSIONS: When reconstructed in the radiological femoral insertion point, MPFL strain patterns were only slightly affected by different patella heights (IS 0.74-1.5) suggesting that MPFL reconstruction could be safely performed using the radiological insertion. However, in case of a patella alta (IS 1.5), a slightly more proximal femoral insertion is beneficial for the biomechanical behaviour of the reconstructed MPFL.
Authors: G Placella; M M Tei; E Sebastiani; G Criscenti; A Speziali; C Mazzola; A Georgoulis; G Cerulli Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2014-08-17 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Petri Sillanpää; Ville M Mattila; Tuomo Visuri; Heikki Mäenpää; Harri Pihlajamäki Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2008-03-18 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Kyung W Nha; Ramprasad Papannagari; Thomas J Gill; Samuel K Van de Velde; Andrew A Freiberg; Harry E Rubash; Guoan Li Journal: J Orthop Res Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 3.494
Authors: John J Elias; Kerwyn C Jones; Molly K Lalonde; Joseph N Gabra; S Cyrus Rezvanifar; Andrew J Cosgarea Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2017-11-11 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Aaron J Krych; Michael P O'Malley; Nick R Johnson; Rohith Mohan; Timothy E Hewett; Michael J Stuart; Diane L Dahm Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2016-12-27 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: John J Elias; Kerwyn C Jones; S Cyrus Rezvanifar; Joseph N Gabra; Melanie A Morscher; Andrew J Cosgarea Journal: Knee Date: 2018-03-13 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Maeruan Kebbach; Martin Darowski; Sven Krueger; Christoph Schilling; Thomas M Grupp; Rainer Bader; Andreas Geier Journal: Materials (Basel) Date: 2020-05-21 Impact factor: 3.623