[Reproducibility of the radiographic analysis of dysplasia of the femoral trochlea. Intra- and interobserver analysis of 68 knees]. / Reproductibilité de l'analyse radiographique de la dysplasie de la trochlée fémorale. Analyse intra- et interobservateur sur 68 genoux.

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The relation between patello-femoral instability and trochlear dysplasia was identified by Dejour. Trochlear dysplasia, diagnosed on knee lateral Xray when the trochlear groove crosses both femoral condyles (the so-called "crossing sign"), must be corrected to improve patello-femoral stability. However surgery should be related to the severity and the shape of trochlear dysplasia, underlining the importance of a reproducible classification. The aim of this study was to establish intra and inter-observer reliability of Dejour's radiographic criteria. MATERIAL: 68 preoperative exact knee profile radiographs were harvested from clinical records of 64 patients who underwent trochleoplasty because of patello-femoral instability and trochlear dysplasia. On these 68 views, the crossing sign was identified by the senior surgeon (F.G.) who performed or supervised surgery. METHOD: The 68 radiographs were examined independently by 7 observers (2 juniors, 5 seniors) in order to assess interobserver agreement. Two juniors repeated the observation to test intraobserver agreement. Reproducibility for categorical data (7 shapes of trochlea according to Dejour (3 for dysplasia)) was evaluated by Kappa statistics, and for numerical data (depth and anterior projection of the trochlear groove with respect to anterior femoral cortex) we used the interclass correlation analysis. RESULTS: Two out of the 7 observers rated all the 68 trochleas as dysplastics. The 5 others rated as normal 1 to 6 trochleas out of the 68. None of the 68 trochleas were recognized with the same shape by the 7 examiners. At best, 6 observers agreed on the same shape and for only 12 trochleas. Disagreement was mostly related to mistakes between type I and type II of dysplasia. For trochlear morphology interobserver agreement was slight (Kappa = 0.17) and intraobserver agreement was fair (Kappa = 0.3). The mean prominence of the trochlea was 3 +/- 2.1 mm [-6 to 10], and the mean trochlea depth was 1 +/- 1.9 mm [0 to 11]. These measurements were more reliable since the interclass correlation coefficients were respectively 0.62 and 0.38. The level of experience of the observers had no influence for categorical or numerical data. DISCUSSION: Our results indicated a low interobserver agreement for trochlear shape identification according to Dejour. The most reliable criteria was measurement of the trochlear prominence which was mostly pathological in our series. The "crossing sign" was reliable to diagnose dysplasia since the probability to rate as normal a true dysplastic trochlea was only 3.1 per cent. However, once the dysplasia diagnosed, this classification gave inconsistent results to select the trochlear shape, particularly for type II. To improve reproducibility we propose to diagnose a type II only when 5 millimeters separate the crossings between the medial and lateral condyles. CONCLUSION: We recommend to use anterior projection of the trochlear groove to rate trochlear dysplasia and to determine the adequate type of trochleoplasty elevating of the lateral facet if non prominent or deepening of the groove when prominent.