These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Isolated versus combined medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction for lateral instability of the patella.
    Author: An VV, Sivakumar BS, Phan K, Fritsch BA, Sher D.
    Journal: J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong); 2019; 27(1):2309499018820698. PubMed ID: 30798706.
    Abstract:
    INTRODUCTION: Medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction (MPFLR) is regularly combined with a tibial tuberosity transfer (TTT) in cases of recurrent patellar instability with underlying structural deformity. However, these indications for a TTT have recently come into question. This study aimed to assess the traditional indications by comparing the outcomes of isolated and combined MPFLR for the treatment of recurrent lateral patellar dislocation. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Included studies were those which reported the outcomes of either isolated or combined or both MPFLR. Studies were required to report at least one of the following: redislocation rate, revision due to instability, or the Kujala score. RESULTS: We found no difference between isolated and combined MPFLR in terms of redislocation ( p = 0.48), revisions due to instability ( p = 0.36), positive apprehension tests ( p = 0.25), or the Kujala score ( p = 0.58). Combined reconstruction presented more complications compared to isolated procedures ( p = 0.05). Subgroup analysis revealed no significant difference between studies investigating isolated medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction MPFLR performed in patients with normal tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove (TT-TG) distances only or in patients with both normal and elevated TT-TG distances. CONCLUSIONS: According to the published data, there is no difference in outcomes between isolated and combined MPFLR. Underlying structural deformity did not demonstrate any significant effect on the success of the isolated MPFLR. Although there are definite indications for combined reconstruction, the current evidence suggests that our inclusion criteria may not be entirely correct. Further study is required to clarify and refine the true indications for combined MPFLR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, meta-analysis of nonrandomized studies.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]