MEDLINE/PubMed Journal Browser Search

Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

Title: Medial Patellofemoral Complex Reconstruction (Combined Reconstruction of Medial Patellofemoral Ligament and Medial Quadriceps Tendon-Femoral Ligament) With Semitendinosus Autograft Resulted in Similar Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes to Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction in Treating Recurrent Patellar Dislocation.
Author: Hu F, Wang C, Du Y, Guo Z, Zhang K, Ma Y, Yang Y, Gong X, Wang H, Liu P, Shi W.
Journal: Arthroscopy; 2024 Apr; 40(4):1264-1276.e1. PubMed ID: 37716628.
Abstract:
PURPOSE: To compare clinical and radiographic outcomes of medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction (MPFL-R) and medial patellofemoral complex reconstruction (MPFC-R) for recurrent patellar dislocation. Outcome measures were compared based on the Insall-Salvati index. METHODS: Patients who were diagnosed with recurrent patellar dislocation and underwent either MPFL-R or MPFC-R (combined reconstruction of MPFL and medial quadriceps tendon-femoral ligament) were retrospectively analyzed. Group allocation was based on surgical procedure and patient characteristics were collected. Clinical assessments included patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and return-to-sports rates. Minimal clinically important difference analysis was performed. A subgroup analysis of PROMs was carried out between patients with an Insall-Salvati index ≤1.2 versus >1.2. The patellar tilt angle, lateral patellar displacement, and bisect offset ratio were measured pre- and postsurgery. Functional failures and complications were assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 70 patients (72 knees) in the MPFL-R group and 58 patients (61 knees) in the MPFC-R group were included. Patient characteristics were comparable between the groups. At a minimum follow-up of 24 (mean, 50.6 ± 22.1) months, all PROMs were substantially improved (P < .001), without significant intergroup differences. The percentages of patients reaching the minimal clinically important difference were similar after MPFL-R and MPFC-R: 98.6% versus 93.4% (International Knee Documentation Committee), 97.2% versus 98.4% (Lysholm), 98.6% versus 100% (Kujala), and 77.8% versus 72.1% (Tegner). The subgroup analysis based on patellar height and the return-to-sport rates also suggested comparable results. Radiographic evaluation demonstrated significantly smaller lateral patellar displacements (P = .004) and bisect offset ratios (P < .001) but similar patellar tilt angles after MPFC-R. Four (5.6%) patients receiving MPFL-R and 2 (3.3%) patients receiving MPFC-R reported recurrence of functional instability, without statistically significant difference. CONCLUSIONS: MPFC-R resulted in similar overall clinical and radiographic outcomes to MPFL-R in treating recurrent patellar dislocation. MPFC-R might not provide additional benefits for patients with an Insall-Salvati index >1.2. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic, retrospective cohort study.

[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]