Search

Purpose To investigate alterations in technique for medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction in the setting of patella alta and describe the effect of these alterations on MPFL anatomometry. Methods Ten cadaveric knees were used. Four candidate femoral attachment sites of MPFL were tested. The attachment sites were Schottle’s point (SP), 5 mm distal to SP, 5 mm proximal to SP, and 10 mm proximal to SP. A suture anchor was placed at the upper 40% of the medial border of the patella with the emanating suture used to simulate the reconstructed ligament. MPFL maximum length change was calculated through a range of motion between 0° and 110°. Recordings at all 4 candidate femoral attachments sites were repeated after a flat tibial tubercle osteotomy and transfer to achieve alta as measured by the Caton–Deschamps Index (CDI) of 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5. Results The 10 specimens had an average CDI of 0.99, range 0.87 to 1.16. In the native tibial tubercle condition, SP was more isometric through 20° to 70° range of motion, or anatomometric, than any other candidate femoral attachment location. With patella alta with a CDI of 1.3 and 1.4, attachment site 5 mm proximal to SP exhibited more anatomometry than SP. With patella alta with a CDI of 1.5, attachment site 10 mm proximal to SP exhibited more anatomometry than SP. Conclusions Increased patella alta significantly alters MPFL anatomometry. With increasing degrees of patella alta, more proximal candidate femoral attachment sites demonstrate decreased change in length compared with SP. None of the varied femoral attachments produced anatomometry over the entirety of the flexion range from 20° to 70°, suggesting that in cases of significant patella alta, proximalization the femoral attachment site of MPFL reconstruction may be necessary to achieve an anatomometric MPFL reconstruction. Clinical Relevance A standardized, isolated MPFL reconstruction may be prone to failure in the setting of patella alta, given the anisometry demonstrated. Alternative femoral attachment sites for MPFL reconstruction should be considered in these patients.

The purposes of this study were (1) to evaluate the percentage of gluteus medius and minimus tendon footprint restoration that can be achieved with fixation using single-row repair versus double-row repair and (2) to evaluate the yield load of a repair of the gluteus medius and minimus tendon using single-row versus double-row repair techniques.Twelve human fresh-frozen cadaveric hip specimens (6 matched pairs, 4 female, mean age 47.5 ± 14.5 years) were tested. Specimens were excluded if they had any prior hip surgery or injury, if any abnormality of the tendon was noted on dissection, or if they had a body mass index20 or35 or a T-score2.0 on dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scanning. Matched pairs were randomized to receive either double-row repair with 2 standard suture anchors and 2 knotless anchor devices or a single-row repair with suture anchors only. The percentage of the footprint area covered after repair was determined using a computer-assisted digitization algorithm. With a mechanical testing system, each repaired specimen was tested for mechanical strength first with cyclic loading and then load to failure testing.Footprint coverage of the lateral facet was significantly greater for double-row repair (mean 76.6%) compared with single-row repair (mean 50.3%) (P = .03). There was no significant difference between single- and double-row repair for posterior-superior or anterior facet coverage. Mechanical testing showed a higher mean yield load for double-row anchor repair (197.6 ± 61.7 N vs 163.5 ± 35.4 N for single-row repair), but this did not reach statistical significance (P = .15). The predominant mode of failure was suture pullout through the musculotendinous unit (9/12 specimens: 5 double-row and 4 single-row).For hip abductor tears, double-row suture repair yields improved footprint coverage compared with single-row repair. Although it did not reach statistical significance, there was a higher mean yield load in the double-row group.Double-row suture fixation technique for hip abductor tears maximizes strength and footprint coverage of the repair.