ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2020
Comparative study of the tibial tubercle-trochlear groove distance measured in two ways and tibial tubercle-posterior cruciate ligament distance in patients with patellofemoral instability.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Tibial Tubercle-Trochlear Groove Distance Has Better Diagnostic Reliability Than Tubercle-Posterior Cruciate Ligament Distance For Predicting Patellar Instability: A Systematic Review.Orthopaedic surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Tibial tubercle to trochlear groove distance versus tibial tubercle to posterior cruciate ligament distance for predicting patellar instability: a systematic review.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2023Pooled it
- Assessment of the reliability and validity of imaging measurements for patellofemoral instability: an updated systematic review.Skeletal radiology · 2022Pooled it
- Measures of Patellofemoral Morphology Predict the Risk of Local Cartilage Damage Progression: A Yale/MOST Collaborative Study.The American journal of sports medicine · 2025Article
- Semiautomated Three-Dimensional Landmark Placement on Knee Models Is a Reliable Method to Describe Bone Shape and Alignment.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Reliability of the Tibial Tubercle-Roman Arch Distance for Evaluating Tibial Tubercle Malposition and Predicting Patellar Dislocation via Magnetic Resonance Imaging.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2022Article
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Patellofemoral Morphometry Reveals Age and Gender Variations in the Knees of Children and Adolescents.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Morphological study of the vastus medialis oblique in recurrent patellar dislocation based on magnetic resonance images.BMC medical imaging · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA comparative analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of three different methods for radiologic evaluation of patellofemoral instability (PFI).
methodsComputed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were performed in 47 patients with or without PFI. The tibial tubercle-trochlear groove (TT-TG) distance was measured by two observers through conventional CT and three-dimensional CT reconstruction (TDR-TT-TG) respectively and the tibial tubercle-posterior cruciate ligament (TT-PCL) distance with MRI. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to evaluate the interobserver reliability. In addition, the differences of three measurements between different patients were compared. The consistency of TT-TG and TDR-TT-TG was analyzed by the Bland-Altman method.
resultsThe ICCs of three measurements were high between two observers; the results were TT-TG (ICC = 0.852), TDR-TT-TG (ICC = 0.864), and TT-PCL (ICC = 0.758). The values of PFI patients were significantly higher than those of non-PFI patients, and the mean TT-TG, TDR-TT-TG, and TT-PCL distance in patients with PFI were 19.0 ± 3.8 mm, 19.0 ± 3.7 mm, and 25.1 ± 3.6 mm, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the TT-TG distance and the TDR-TT-TG distance, we found no significant difference. The Bland-Altman analysis showed that the TDR-TT-TG distance was in good agreement with the TT-TG distance.
conclusionAll three methods can be used to assess PFI; the TDR-TT-TG measurement method has superior operability and better interobserver consistency. It may be an alternative method to the conventional TT-TG distance measurement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.