Impact of five different medial patellofemoral ligament-reconstruction strategies and three different graft pre-tensioning states on the mean patellofemoral contact pressure: a biomechanical study on human cadaver knees

Abstract Background The medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) is the main stabiliser of the patella and thus mostly reconstructed in the surgical treatment of patellofemoral dislocation. The aims of this study were to gain a better understanding of the influence of altered MPFL graft-fixation locati...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Daniel Dornacher, Sabine Lippacher, Manfred Nelitz, Heiko Reichel, Anita Ignatius, Lutz Dürselen, Andreas Martin Seitz
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SpringerOpen 2018-06-01
Series:Journal of Experimental Orthopaedics
Subjects:
Online Access:http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40634-018-0140-x
Description
Summary:Abstract Background The medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) is the main stabiliser of the patella and thus mostly reconstructed in the surgical treatment of patellofemoral dislocation. The aims of this study were to gain a better understanding of the influence of altered MPFL graft-fixation locations and different graft pre-tensions on patellofemoral contact pressure. Methods Six human cadaveric knee joints were placed in a six-degree-of-freedom knee simulator. Mean PFCP (mPFCP) was evaluated in knee flexion of 0, 30 and 90° using a calibrated pressure-measurement system. After data assessment of the native knee joint, five MPFL reconstruction conditions were conducted: Anatomical double bundle; non-anatomical proximal patellar; non-anatomical distal patellar; non-anatomical proximal femoral; non-anatomical ventral femoral. The gracilis graft was fixed at a defined knee flexion of 30° and pre-tensioned to 2, 10 and 20 N. Results Kruskal-Wallis testing resulted in no mPFCP differences between the native and anatomical reconstruction states. Comparing the native and anatomical reconstruction states with the non-anatomical reconstruction states, no difference in the mPFCP both in knee extension (0°) (p>0.366) and in 30° knee flexion (p>0.349) was found. At 90° knee flexion, the following differences were identified: compared to the native knee state, the mPFCP increased after non-anatomical proximal femoral and non-anatomical ventral femoral reconstruction by 257% (p=0.04) and 292% (p=0.016), respectively. Compared to the anatomical reconstruction state, the mPFCP increased after non-anatomical proximal femoral reconstruction by 199% (p=0.042). Discussion and Conclusions With respect to all study findings and to restore a physiological PFCP, we recommend using the anatomical footprints for MPFL reconstruction and a moderate graft pretensioning of 2-10 N.
ISSN:2197-1153