Nonanatomical femoral tunnel positioning in isolated MPFL reconstruction is not associated with an increased risk of patellofemoral osteoarthritis after a minimum follow-up of 10 years.

PURPOSE: The association between the prevalence of patellofemoral arthritis (PFA) and femoral tunnel positioning following isolated medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction (MPFLr) has not been well described. The aim of this study was to analyse the relationship between femoral tunnel positioning and the prevalence of PFA. METHODS: This was a single-centre study of patients undergoing an isolated MPFLr between 2006 and 2011 with a minimum of 10 years of follow-up. Outcomes assessed were the presence of PFA on radiographs, recurrence of instability requiring revision surgery and patient-reported outcomes, including Kujala, Tegner and IKDC scores. Tunnel positioning was assessed on postoperative radiographs using two radiographic methods: Schöttle's point and the grid method to localise the femoral tunnel. Patients were grouped based on tunnel positioning and compared. RESULTS: Fifty patients were analysed at a mean follow-up of 12.4 years. Thirty-three patients (66%) had a femoral tunnel position within 7 mm of Schöttle's point and 39 (78%) within the anatomic quadrant, with the most common location according to the grid method in D4 (28%) and E4 (26%), respectively. Thirty-seven patients (74%) had a satisfactory (>80 versus <80) Kujala score at long-term follow-up. None of the examined tunnel assessment methods demonstrated a significant relationship with Tegner, Kujala or International Knee Documentation Committee scores. Patients with a femoral tunnel position >7 mm outside Schöttle's point or were considered to be in a nonanatomic position were not significantly more likely to result in unsatisfactory Kujala scores at the last follow-up. Tunnel positioning and the other tested parameters were not found to be significantly associated with the development of PFA. CONCLUSION: No correlation between femoral tunnel position and risk of PFA or poor outcomes was observed in patients undergoing isolated MPFLr at long-term follow-up. The impact of femoral tunnel placement on long-term outcomes in patients with PFI may be less significant than originally considered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Risk of suprascapular nerve injury in open Trillat procedure: an anatomical study.

PURPOSE: The open Trillat Procedure described to treat recurrent shoulder instability, has a renewed interest with the advent of arthroscopy. The suprascapular nerve (SSN) is theoretically at risk during the drilling of the scapula near the spinoglenoid notch. The purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between the screw securing the coracoid transfer and the SSN during open Trillat Procedure and define a safe zone for the SSN. METHODS: In this anatomical study, an open Trillat Procedure was performed on ten shoulders specimens. The coracoid was fixed by a screw after partial osteotomy and antero-posterior drilling of the scapular neck. The SSN was dissected with identification of the screw. We measured the distances SSN-screw (distance 1) and SSN-glenoid rim (distance 2). In axial plane, we measured the angles between the glenoid plane and the screw (α angle) and between the glenoid plane and the SSN (ß angle). RESULTS: The mean distance SSN-screw was 8.8 mm +/-5.4 (0-15). Mean α angle was 11°+/-2.4 (8-15). Mean ß angle was 22°+/-6.7 (12-30). No macroscopic lesion of the SSN was recorded but in 20% (2 cases), the screw was in contact with the nerve. In both cases, the ß angle was measured at 12°. CONCLUSION: During the open Trillat Procedure, the SSN can be injured due to its anatomical location. Placement of the screw should be within 10° of the glenoid plane to minimize the risk of SSN injury and could require the use of a specific guide or arthroscopic-assisted surgery.

What is the best fixation method in medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction? A biomechanical comparison of common methods for femoral graft attachment.

INTRODUCTION: A variety of techniques have been described for femoral fixation in medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction (MPFLr). The aim of this study was to compare the biomechanical performance of the most used methods for graft fixation in the femur using human cadaveric tissue. We wondered what is the best fixation method for femoral fixation in MPFL reconstruction? HYPOTHESIS: A suspensory fixation device provides the best femoral fixation. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Twenty cadaveric knees were tested. Four femoral fixation methods were compared (5 knees per group): interference fixation with a Biosure© RG 5 mm and a 7 mm, suture anchor (Healicoil Regenesorb 4.75 mm ©) and suspensory fixation with the Ultrabutton©. The testing was divided in preconditioning, cyclic loading and load to failure. Load to failure, elongation, stiffness and mode of failure were recorded and compared. RESULTS: The Ultrabutton© had the highest mean ultimate load (427 ± 215 N (p = 0.5)), followed by Healicoil anchor © (308 ± 44 N (p > 0.05)) and the interference screw of 7 mm (255 ± 170 N (p > 0.05)). Mean stiffness was similar in the Ultrabutton© and 4.75 mm. Healicoil anchor © groups (111 ± 21 N/mm and 119 ± 20 N/mm respectively), and lowest in 7 mm Biosure© screw fixation group (90 ± 5 N/mm). The Biosure© 5 mm RG screw presented 100% of premature rupture because of tendon slippage. The Ultrabutton© presented the lowest premature rupture (40%). DISCUSSION: A suspensory fixation for the femur had the lowest number of graft failures and highest load to failure. This study has implications for surgeons' choice of graft fixation in MPFLr. It is the first study to test the most commonly femoral used fixation methods, allowing direct comparisons between each method.