Radiographic landmarks for tunnel placement in reconstruction of the medial patellofemoral ligament

2012 ◽  
Vol 20 (12) ◽  
pp. 2380-2384 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. J. Barnett ◽  
N. R. Howells ◽  
B. J. Burston ◽  
A. Ansari ◽  
D. Clark ◽  
...  
2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (11) ◽  
pp. 2572-2576
Author(s):  
Vera Jaecker ◽  
Jan-Hendrik Naendrup ◽  
Thomas R. Pfeiffer ◽  
Bertil Bouillon ◽  
Sven Shafizadeh

Background: Lateral extra-articular tenodesis (LET) is being increasingly performed as an additional procedure in both primary and revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in patients with excessive anterolateral rotatory instability. Consistent guidelines for femoral tunnel placement would aid in intraoperative reproducible graft placement and postoperative evaluation of LET procedures. Purpose: To determine radiographic landmarks of a recently described isometric femoral attachment area in LET procedures with reference to consistent radiographic reference lines. Study Design: Descriptive laboratory study. Methods: Ten fresh-frozen cadaveric knees were dissected. The footprints of the lateral femoral epicondyle (LFE) apex and the deep aspects of the iliotibial tract, with its Kaplan fiber attachments (KFAs) on the distal femur, were marked with a 2.5-mm steel ball. True lateral radiographic images were taken. Mean absolute LFE and KFA distances were measured from the posterior cortex line (anterior-posterior direction) and from the perpendicular line intersecting the contact of the posterior femoral condyle (proximal-distal direction), respectively. Furthermore, positions were measured relative to the femur width. Finally, radiographic descriptions of an isometric femoral attachment area were developed. Results: The mean LFE and KFA positions were found to be 4 ± 4 mm posterior and 4 ± 3 mm anterior to the posterior cortex line, and 6 ± 4 mm distal and 20 ± 5 mm proximal to the perpendicular line intersecting the posterior femoral condyle, respectively. The mean LFE and KFA locations, relative to the femur width, were found at –12% and 11% (anterior-posterior) and –17% and 59% (proximal-distal), respectively. Femoral tunnel placement on or posterior to the femoral cortex line and proximal to the posterior femoral condyle within a 10-mm distance ensures that the tunnel remains safely located in the isometric zone. Conclusion: Radiographic landmarks for an isometric femoral tunnel placement in LET procedures were described. Clinical Relevance: These findings may help to intraoperatively guide surgeons for an accurate, reproducible femoral tunnel placement and to reduce the potential risk of tunnel misplacement, as well as to aid in the postoperative evaluation of LET procedures in patients with residual complaints.


2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (09) ◽  
pp. 879-886 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurie Hiemstra ◽  
Catherine O'Brien ◽  
Mark Lafave ◽  
Sarah Kerslake

AbstractThe purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy of femoral tunnel placement in a medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction (MPFL-R) cohort. The secondary purpose was to establish the evidence of a learning curve to achieve acceptable femoral tunnel placement during MPFL-R. Two surgeons, using lateral radiographs, assessed 73 subjects post–MPFL-R. Femoral tunnel accuracy and direction of tunnel error were measured in relation to Schöttle's point (A–T distance). Interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient 2,k) of these measures was calculated. Learning curve of accurate femoral tunnel placement was examined by dividing the patient cohort into quartiles. A one-way analysis of variance was used to assess the quartiles for accuracy of femoral tunnel position and surgical time. In relation to Schöttle's point, 66/73 (90.4%) femoral tunnels were categorized as being in a “good” or “excellent” position and 7/73 (9.6%) were categorized as being in a “poor” position. Evidence of an MPFL-R learning curve was established via a statistically significant difference in the mean A to T distance for the four quartiles (F [3, 69] = 6.41, p = 0.001). There was also a statistically significant difference in the surgical time for the four quartiles (F [3, 69] = 8.71, p = 0.001). In this series, accurate femoral tunnels were placed more than 90% of the time during MPFL-R. A clear learning curve for accurate femoral tunnel placement was demonstrated both with respect to distance of the tunnel from Schöttle point and with regard to surgical time. Level of evidence was IV.


2012 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam M. Johannsen ◽  
Colin J. Anderson ◽  
Coen A. Wijdicks ◽  
Lars Engebretsen ◽  
Robert F. LaPrade

Background: Consistent radiographic guidelines for tunnel placement in single- or double-bundle posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) reconstructions are not well defined. Quantitative guidelines reporting the location of the individual PCL bundle attachments would aid in intraoperative tunnel placement and postoperative assessment of a PCL reconstruction. Hypothesis: Consistent and reproducible measurements in relation to radiographic landmarks for the entire PCL and its individual bundle attachments are achievable. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: The femoral and tibial PCL bundle attachment centers of 20 nonpaired fresh-frozen cadaveric knees were labeled using radio-opaque spheres and the attachment areas were labeled using barium sulfate. Anteroposterior (AP) and lateral radiographs of the femur and tibia were obtained, and measurements of the distances between the PCL bundle centers and landmarks were acquired. Results: On the AP femur view, the anterolateral bundle (ALB) and posteromedial bundle (PMB) centers were 34.1 ± 3.0 mm and 29.2 ± 3.0 mm lateral to the most medial border of the medial femoral condyle, respectively. The lateral femur images revealed that the ALB center was 17.4 ± 1.7 mm and the PMB center was 23.9 ± 2.7 mm posteroproximal to a line perpendicular to the Blumensaat line that intersected the anterior margin of the medial femoral condyle cortex. Anteroposterior tibia images revealed that the ALB and PMB centers were located 0.2 ± 2.1 mm proximal and 4.9 ± 2.9 mm distal to the proximal joint line, respectively. The PCL attachment center was 1.6 ± 2.5 mm distal to the proximal joint line. On the lateral tibia view, the ALB center was 8.4 ± 1.8 mm, the PCL attachment center was 5.5 ± 1.7 mm, and the PMB center was 2.5 ± 1.5 mm superior to the champagne glass drop-off of the posterior tibia. Conclusion: Radiographic measurements from several clinically relevant views of the femur and tibia were reproducible with regard to the anatomic locations of the ALB and PMB centers. The measurements from the lateral femur and tibia views provided the most clinically pertinent radiographic measurements intraoperatively. Clinical Relevance: This study established a set of clinically relevant radiographic guidelines for anatomic reconstruction of the PCL. The parameters set forth in this study can be used in both the intraoperative and postoperative settings for both single- and double-bundle PCL reconstructions.


2020 ◽  
pp. 036354652097242
Author(s):  
Jiebo Chen ◽  
Kang Han ◽  
Jia Jiang ◽  
Xiaoqiao Huangfu ◽  
Song Zhao ◽  
...  

Background: Medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction is one of the main treatments for lateral patellar translation. Based on intraoperative true lateral radiographs, the accepted methods for femoral MPFL tunnel location are potentially inaccurate. Direct assessment of anatomic characteristics during surgery through palpation of the anatomic landmarks involving the saddle sulcus might help eliminate tunnel malposition. Hypothesis: The saddle sulcus is a reliable osseous landmark where the MPFL attaches for tunnel placement. Study Design: Descriptive laboratory study. Methods: A total of 9 fresh-frozen unpaired human cadaveric knees were dissected; MPFL insertion point and relative osseous structures were marked. Three-dimensional images and transformed true lateral radiographs were obtained for analysis; 3 previously reported radiographic reference points for MPFL femoral tunnel placement were determined on all images and compared with the anatomic insertion. Results: A saddle sulcus consistently existed where the MPFL was attached, located at 11.7 ± 5.9 mm from the apex of the adductor tubercle (AT) to the medial epicondyle (ME), 62.8% of the average distance between the apexes of the AT and ME, and 5.6 ± 2.8 mm perpendicular-posterior to the border connecting the AT and ME. The reported radiographic reference points were located at average distances of 6.2 ± 3.2 mm (Schöttle method), 5.9 ± 2.3 mm (Redfern method), and 7.3 ± 6.6 mm (Fujino method) from the saddle sulcus center on the true lateral radiographs. Conclusion: The saddle sulcus was a reliable landmark where the MPFL was anatomically attached, located approximately 12 mm from the AT to the ME (approximately 60% along a line from the AT to the ME) and 6 mm perpendicular-posterior to the border connecting the apexes of the AT and ME. Additionally, the saddle sulcus position presented variability on the femoral aspect of different knees. All of the average direct distances from the sulcus to the reference radiographic points exceeded 5 mm, and tunnel localizations on a true lateral radiograph were inaccurate. Clinical Relevance: This study demonstrates the potential precise position of the saddle sulcus, according to the ME and AT, as a reliable anatomic landmark for MPFL femoral tunnel location. Radiographic reference points were not accurate during MPFL reconstruction. Direct palpation of the landmarks might be effective for femoral MPFL tunnel placement.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document