Search

Background: The tibial tubercle deviation associated with recurrent patellar dislocation (RPD) has not been studied sufficiently. New methods of evaluation were used to verify the extent of tubercle deviation in a group with patellar dislocation compared with that in a control group, the frequency of patients who demonstrated a cutoff value indicating that tubercle transfer was warranted on the basis of the control group distribution, and the validity of these methods of evaluation for diagnosing RPD.Methods: Sixty-six patients with a history of patellar dislocation (single in 19 [SPD group] and recurrent in 47 [RPD group]) and 66 age and sex-matched controls were analyzed with the use of computed tomography (CT). The tibial tubercle-posterior cruciate ligament (TT-PCL) distance, TT-PCL ratio, and tibial tubercle lateralization (TTL) in the SPD and RPD groups were compared with those in the control group. Cutoff values to warrant 10 mm of transfer were based on either the minimum or -2SD (2 standard deviations below the mean) value in the control group, and the prevalences of patients in the RPD group with measurements above these cutoff values were calculated. The area under the curve (AUC) in receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to assess the effectiveness of the measurements as predictors of RPD.Results: The mean TT-PCL distance, TT-PCL ratio, and TTL were all significantly greater in the RPD group than in the control group. The numbers of patients in the RPD group who satisfied the cutoff criteria when they were based on the minimum TT-PCL distance, TT-PCL ratio, and TTL in the control group were 11 (23%), 7 (15%), and 6 (13%), respectively. When the cutoff values were based on the -2SD values in the control group, the numbers of patients were 8 (17%), 6 (13%), and 0, respectively. The AUC of the ROC curve for TT-PCL distance, TT-PCL ratio, and TTL was 0.66, 0.72, and 0.72, respectively.Conclusions: The extent of TTL in the RPD group was not substantial, and the percentages of patients for whom 10 mm of medial transfer was indicated were small.Level Of Evidence: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The acetabular fossa is thought to be located in the center of the acetabulum, and acetabular reaming in total hip arthroplasty is conventionally performed in the center of the fossa. However, the actual location of the fossa and the influence that hypoplasia or deformity may have on the position of the fossa are unknown. We hypothesized that the fossa is located in the center of the acetabulum, regardless of hypoplasia or deformity.Methods: Fifty patients with normal hips (normal hip group), 50 patients with dysplasia who underwent rotational acetabular osteotomy (dysplastic hip group), and 46 patients with osteoarthritis who underwent total hip arthroplasty (osteoarthritic hip group) were evaluated by computed tomography (CT) imaging. On the horizontal plane that passes through the center of the femoral head, the center line of the acetabulum was defined as the perpendicular bisector of the anterior and posterior rims of the acetabulum. The angle and distance of the center of the acetabular fossa in relation to the center line of the acetabulum were evaluated; furthermore, the center position of the fossa from the anterior margin of the acetabulum was calculated as a ratio relative to acetabular size. A 1-way analysis of variance was performed to compare measurements among the 3 groups.Results: The center of the acetabular fossa was positioned anteriorly to the center line of the acetabulum in all 3 groups. The mean center angle of the acetabular fossa was 14.0° ± 3.8°, 15.2° ± 5.6°, and 14.9° ± 5.5° in the normal, dysplastic, and osteoarthritic hip groups, respectively (p = 0.33). The mean center distance of the acetabular fossa was 5.6 ± 1.8, 5.8 ± 2.3, and 6.1 ± 2.2 mm, respectively (p = 0.55). The mean center position of the acetabular fossa was 38.8% ± 3.3%, 38.5% ± 4.2%, and 38.3% ± 3.9%, respectively (p = 0.71).Conclusions: The center of the acetabular fossa is positioned anteriorly to the center of the acetabulum, and the positioning is affected by neither dysplasia nor osteoarthritis. The preconception that the center of the acetabulum corresponds to the center of the acetabular fossa may risk eccentric reaming, possibly damaging the anterior wall.Level Of Evidence: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance is used as an indicator for medial tibial tubercle transfer; however, to our knowledge, no studies have verified whether this distance is strongly affected by tubercle lateralization at the proximal part of the tibia. We hypothesized that the tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance is mainly affected by tibial tubercle lateralization at the proximal part of the tibia. Methods: Forty-four patients with a history of patellar dislocation and forty-four age and sex-matched controls were analyzed with use of computed tomography. The tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance, tibial tubercle lateralization, trochlear groove medialization, and knee rotation were measured and were compared between the patellar dislocation group and the control group. The association between the tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance and three other parameters was calculated with use of the Pearson correlation coefficient and partial correlation analysis. Results: There were significant differences in the tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance (p < 0.001) and knee rotation (p < 0.001), but there was no difference in the tibial tubercle lateralization (p = 0.13) and trochlear groovemedialization (p = 0.08) between the patellar dislocation group and the control group. The tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance had no linear correlation with tubercle lateralization (r = 0.21) or groove medialization (r = 20.15); however, knee rotation had a good positive correlation in the patellar dislocation group (r = 0.62). After adjusting for the remaining parameters, knee rotation strongly correlated with the tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance (r = 0.69, p < 0.001), whereas tubercle lateralization showed moderate significant correlations in the patellar dislocation group (r = 0.42; p = 0.005). Conclusions: Because the tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance is affected more by knee rotation than by tubercle malposition, its use as an indicator for tibial tubercle transfer may not be appropriate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]