ArticleArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2026
External Adhesive Marker Technique Shows Excellent Reproducibility for Measuring Patellar Tendon-to-Lateral Trochlear Ridge Distance on Magnetic Resonance Imaging.
Article in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the agreement between a simple magnetic resonance imaging-based measurement method for determining the patellar tendon-to-lateral trochlear ridge (PT-LTR) distance using an external adhesive marker and a previously validated conventional measurement technique. Methods: Patients diagnosed with patellofemoral instability before undergoing primary patellar stabilization surgery at a single institution between 2020 and 2024 were eligible for inclusion. PT-LTR distances were measured in a blinded fashion by 2 musculoskeletal-trained radiologists using the conventional technique and by an orthopaedic group using the simple technique. Interrater reliability between the musculoskeletal-trained radiologists and between the orthopaedic groups was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and concordance correlation coefficients (CCCs) and subsequently intermethod reliability between the 2 groups. The measurements were plotted on concordance correlation graphs. Results: One hundred knees (38 right, 62 left) from 97 patients (37 men, 60 women; mean age 22 ± 9 years) were included. The average distance for PT-LTR measured by the radiologists using the conventional technique was 10.9 ± 7.5 mm and by the orthopaedic group using the simple technique was 9.3 ± 6.8 mm. Excellent interobserver agreement was noted for the radiologist group (ICC 0.941, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.914-0.960; CCC 0.941, 95% CI, 0.915-0.959) and orthopaedic group (ICC 0.976, 95% CI, 0.964-0.985; CCC 0.976, 95% CI, 0.965-0.984). Excellent intermethod agreement was noted between the 2 techniques (ICC 0.903, 95% CI, 0.775-0.942; CCC 0.902, 95% CI, 0.861-0.932). Conclusions: There was excellent interobserver reliability for measuring PT-LTR distance using both the conventional radiologist-based technique and the external adhesive marker technique. Excellent intermethod agreement was also shown between the 2 techniques, with comparable mean measurements between groups; thus, the simple technique can be used as a reproducible alternative for PT-LTR distance. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study.
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.