ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2025
Difference in Characteristics of Patients Undergoing Revision MPFL Reconstruction and Those Undergoing Primary MPFL Reconstruction.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In recurrent patellar instability, medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction (MPFLR), with or without concomitant bony procedures, has become the treatment of choice to stabilize the patellofemoral joint. In the setting of recurrent patellar instability after primary MPFLR, revision MPFLR can be considered. Numerous potential risk factors for failure of isolated primary MPFLR have been evaluated with mixed findings. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to compare anatomic and demographic patient characteristics between patients undergoing primary and revision MPFLR. It was hypothesized that patients undergoing revision MPFLR will demonstrate a higher prevalence of anatomic risk factors and J-tracking and will demonstrate more articular cartilage damage than patients undergoing primary MPFLR. Study Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed to identify patients who underwent primary MPFLR between 2009 and 2021 and revision MPFLR between 2009 and 2023. Patients were categorized into 2 groups based on whether they underwent primary or revision MPFLR. Demographic (age, sex, and body mass index [BMI]), anatomic characteristics (patellar height, trochlear morphology, and tibial tubercle-trochlear groove distance), physical examination findings (presence or absence of a J-sign), and intraoperative findings (articular cartilage damage of the patellofemoral joint) were compared between these groups. Results: A total of 164 patients who underwent MPFLR within this period, including 26 revision and 138 primary procedures, were evaluated. No difference in patient age, sex, or any measure of patellar height was noted between the 2 groups. The revision MPFLR group was noted to have a higher BMI (29.9 kg/m Conclusion: Patients undergoing revision MPFLR had more prior patellar dislocations, higher BMI, and more trochlear dysplasia (increased sulcus angle and more frequent crossing sign) than those undergoing primary MPFLR. The revision group was also more likely to have a J-sign on clinical examination and patellar articular cartilage damage at the time of arthroscopy.
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.