Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37790196›Full record

ArticleJB & JS open access

Patient-Individualized Identification of Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Attachment Site to Femur Using "CLASS" MRI Sequences.

Marc Barrera Uso, Grégoire Thürig, Alexander Frank Heimann, Joseph M Schwab, Raul Panadero-Morales, José Luis Peris, Moritz Tannast, Daniel Petek

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JB & JS open access. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Marc Barrera UsoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Hospital and University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2774-1170
Grégoire ThürigDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Hospital and University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0924-133X
Alexander Frank HeimannDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Hospital and University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6578-5759
Joseph M SchwabDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Hospital and University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7068-5215
Raul Panadero-MoralesBiomechanics Institute of Valencia, Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-1669-9100
José Luis PerisBiomechanics Institute of Valencia, Universitat Politècnica de València, Valencia, Spain.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3780-2659
Moritz TannastDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Hospital and University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2761-565X
Daniel PetekDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Hospital and University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1164-3426

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Malposition of the femoral tunnel during medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction may increase the risk of recurrence of patellar dislocation due to isometric changes during flexion and extension. Different methods have been described to identify the MPFL isometric point using fluoroscopy. However, femoral tunnel malposition was found to be the cause of 38.1% of revisions due to patellar redislocation. This high rate of malposition has raised the question of individual anatomical variability. Methods: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed on 80 native knees using the CLASS (MRI-generated Compressed Lateral and anteroposterior Anatomical Systematic Sequence) algorithm to identify the femoral MPFL insertion. The insertions were identified on the MRI views by 2 senior orthopaedic surgeons in order to assess the reliability and reproducibility of the method. The distribution of the MPFL insertion locations was then described in a 2-plane coordinate system and compared with MPFL insertion locations identified with other methods in previously published studies. Results: The CLASS MPFL footprint was located 0.83 mm anterior to the posterior cortex (line 1) and 3.66 mm proximal to the Blumensaat line (line 2). Analysis demonstrated 0.90 and 0.89 reproducibility and 0.89 and 0.80 reliability of the CLASS method to identify the anatomical femoral MPFL insertion point. The distribution did not correlate with previously published data obtained with other methods. The definitions of the MPFL insertion point in the studies by Schöttle et al. and Fujino et al. most closely approximated the CLASS location in relation to the posterior femoral cortex, but there were significant differences between the CLASS method and all 4 previously published methods in relation to the proximal-distal location. When we averaged the distances from line 1 and line 2, the method that came closest to the CLASS method was that of Stephen et al., followed by the method of Schöttle et al. Conclusions: The CLASS algorithm is a reliable and reproducible method to identify the MPFL femoral insertion from MRI views. Measurement using the CLASS algorithm shows substantial individual anatomical variation that may not be adequately captured with existing measurement methods. While further research must target translation of this method to clinical use, we believe that this method has the potential to create a safe template for sagittal fluoroscopic identification of the femoral tunnel during MPFL surgical reconstruction. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Identifiers

PMID37790196
PMCPMC10545411

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.