| Literature DB >> 35399425 |
Sameen Taj1, Gunapriya Raghunath1, Karthikeyan Gurusamy1, Zareena Begum1, Vandana Kaveripakkam1, Priya Dharshini1.
Abstract
Background The patella is also known as the kneecap. It lies in front of the knee joint and protects the joint from damage. It is the largest sesamoid bone in the body and is embedded within the quadriceps tendon. The morphometry of the patella is crucial in forensic analysis, designing of implants, and subsequent reconstruction procedures in the knee as it is a sesamoid bone, without periosteum, whereby the natural healing process becomes difficult. The dimensions of the implant are very crucial for a successful knee replacement procedure. This study aims to provide a comprehensive morphometric analysis of the patella and further compare the same between right and left-sided patella specimens. Methodology In total, 50 dry patella specimens, with 26 left-sided specimens and 24 right-sided specimens, were obtained for the study from the Department of Anatomy, Saveetha Medical College, Chennai. The parameters analyzed in the study included height, width, the thickness of the patella, length and width of the articular facets on medial and lateral aspects, and central ridge length. Results The morphometric analysis showed the mean height, width, and thickness of patella specimens were 4.07 cm, 4.12 cm, and 2.03 cm, respectively. The dimensions of the articular facet on the lateral aspect were found to show statistical variation compared to the dimensions of the medial articular facet, where p-values of <0.05 were taken as statistically significant. Based on Koyunco's Classification, 92% of patella specimens were of Type B. Conclusions The morphometric analysis of the patella in this study can be helpful in designing implants for reconstruction and for treating orthopedics in patellar reconstruction and fixation procedures.Entities:
Keywords: articular facets; knee joint; morphometry; patella; tkr
Year: 2022 PMID: 35399425 PMCID: PMC8981413 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.22879
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cureus ISSN: 2168-8184
Figure 1The dry specimens of the patella obtained for the study.
Figure 2Morphometric analysis of the patella.
(A, B) Left and right patella specimens. (C, D) The measurement of the length of patella specimens (linear distance between the superior border and the apex). (E, F) The measurement of the width of patella specimens (linear distance between the medial and lateral border).
Figure 3Morphometric analysis of the patella.
(A, B) The measurement of the thickness of the patella (linear distance between the anterior surface and the median ridge on the posterior surface). (C) The measurement of the width of the lateral articular facet (maximum width from the lateral border to the median ridge). (D) The measurement of the width of the medial articular facet (maximum width from the medial border to the median ridge). (E) The measurement of the length of the patellar ridge (maximum length from the superior point to the inferior point of the ridge).
The mean ± SD, minimum values, and maximum values along with t-values and p-values of different parameters of right and left-sided specimens of the patella (in cm).
SD: standard deviation
| Parameters | Right patella (N = 24) | Left patella (N = 26) | t-value | P-value | ||||
| Mean ± SD | Minimum | Maximum | Mean ± SD | Minimum | Maximum | |||
| Patella height | 4.00 ± 0.34 | 3.50 | 4.80 | 4.13 ± 0.49 | 3.30 | 5.10 | -1.111 | 0.272 |
| Patella width | 4.11 ± 0.37 | 3.30 | 4.90 | 4.13 ± 0.28 | 3.60 | 4.50 | -0.285 | 0.777 |
| Patella thickness | 2.04 ± 0.16 | 1.80 | 2.40 | 2.01 ± 0.18 | 1.70 | 2.40 | 0.622 | 0.537 |
| Ridge length | 2.77 ± 0.23 | 2.30 | 3.10 | 2.75 ± 0.35 | 1.90 | 3.30 | 0.201 | 0.842 |
| Medial articular facet length | 2.42 ± 0.24 | 2.00 | 3.00 | 2.41 ± 0.29 | 1.90 | 3.00 | 0.177 | 0.860 |
| Medial articular facet width | 2.15 ± 0.21 | 1.80 | 2.50 | 2.05 ± 0.26 | 1.50 | 2.60 | 1.528 | 0.133 |
| Lateral articular facet length | 2.92 ± 0.19 | 2.30 | 3.20 | 2.90 ± 0.28 | 2.30 | 3.50 | 0.188 | 0.852 |
| Lateral articular facet width | 2.43 ± 0.19 | 2.10 | 2.70 | 2.48 ± 0.20 | 2.10 | 2.90 | -0.989 | 0.328 |
The mean values of the medial and lateral articular facet width of right-sided patella specimens along with statistical significance.
| Variables | N | Mean ± SD | t-value | P-value |
| Medial articular facet width right | 24 | 2.16 ± 0.19 | -6.922 | 0.0001 |
| Lateral articular facet width right | 24 | 2.41 ± 0.18 |
The mean values of the medial and lateral articular facet width of left-sided patella specimens along with statistical significance.
| Variables | N | Mean ± SD | t-value | P-value |
| Medial articular facet width left | 26 | 2.05 ± 0.28 | -7.590 | 0.0001 |
| Lateral articular facet width left | 26 | 2.50 ± 0.20 |
The classification of the patella in this study based on Koyuncu’s classification.
Class A: where widths of both articular facets are the same; class B: where the articular facet on the lateral aspect is larger than the medial facet; class C: where the articular facet on the medial aspect is larger than the lateral facet.
| Class | Number of patellae (%) |
| A | 4% |
| B | 92% |
| C | 4% |
A comparison of the morphometric values of this study with studies done in other geographic populations.
| Study | Mean patellar height (cm) | Mean patellar thickness (cm) | Mean patellar width (cm) |
| Present study (2022); South Indian population | 4.07 | 2.03 | 4.12 |
| Olateju et al. (2013) [ | 4.37 | 2.41 | 4.51 |
| Yoo et al. (2007) [ | 4.46 | 2.23 | 4.41 |
| Iranpour et al. (2008) [ | 3.43 | 2.24 | Not available |
| Baldwin and House (2005) [ | Not available | 2.26 | 4.69 |
| Shang et al. (2014) [ | 3.99 | 2.27 | 4.41 |
| Katchy et al. (2020) [ | 4.61 | 2.66 | 4.69 |
| Rahman et al. (2020) [ | 3.13 | 2.07 | 4.07 |
A comparison of morphometry of the patella with other Indian studies.
| Study | Patella height (cm) | Patella width (cm) | Patella thickness (cm) | Width of the medial articular facet (cm) | Width of the lateral articular facet (cm) |
| Present study (2022) | 4.07 | 4.12 | 2.03 | 2.10 | 2.46 |
|
Muhamed et al. (2017) [ | Not available | 4.22 | 2.03 | Not available | 2.25 |
|
Biswas et al. (2019) [ | 3.99 | 4.08 | 1.95 | 1.51 | 2.25 |
|
Kumar et al. (2020) [ | Not available | 4.42 | 1.93 | Not available | 2.50 |
|
Baisakh et al. (2021) [ | 3.67 | 3.65 | 1.83 | 1.87 | 2.10 |