Yin Li, Liao Tzu-Chieh, Yang Liu, Powers Christopher M
Center for Joint Surgery, Southwest Hospital, The Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China.
Jacquelin Perry Musculoskeletal Biomechanics Research Lab, Division of Biokinesiology and Physical Therapy, University of Southern California, 1540 E Alcazar Street, CHP-155, Los Angeles, CA, 90089-9006, USA.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016 Nov;474(11):2451-2461. doi: 10.1007/s11999-016-5027-5. Epub 2016 Aug 30.
Patellofemoral malalignment associated with patella alta may cause pain and arthritis; because of this, the condition sometimes is treated surgically. Two common procedures are tibial tubercle distalization with or without patellar tendon tenodesis. However, the biomechanical consequences of these interventions for patella alta are not clearly understood.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We evaluated changes in patellofemoral joint contact mechanics after tibial tubercle distalization and tibial tubercle distalization combined with patella tendon tenodesis. Specifically, we asked: (1) Are there biomechanical differences between these two types of procedures? (2) Is there an ideal range to distalize the patella?
Subject-specific finite-element models were created for 10 individuals with patella alta (mean Insall-Salvati ratio of 1.34 ± 0.05). Input parameters for the finite-element models included subject-specific joint geometry, quadriceps muscle forces, and weightbearing patellofemoral joint kinematics. Virtual operations were conducted to simulate the two procedures. For distalization, the tibial tubercle and patella were displaced distally 4 mm to 20 mm in 4-mm increments based on the original model. At each level of distalization, the patella tendon was attached back to its original insertion to simulate the additional tenodesis procedure. Cartilage stress, contact area, and contact forces were quantified and compared between procedures and distalization levels.
Distalization and distalization + tenodesis reduced patellofemoral joint stress compared with the baseline of 1.02 ± 0.11 MPa. Distalization led to lower cartilage stress than distalization + tenodesis, and the effect size was relatively large (0.88 ± 0.10 MPa vs 0.92 ± 0.10 MPa; mean difference, 0.04 MPa [95% CI, 0.02 MPa-0.05 MPa], p < 0.01; effect size of 1.64 [Cohen's d], with Insall-Salvati ratio decreased to 0.95). For both procedures, the trend of stress reduction plateaued when the Install-Salvati ratio approached 0.95.
Cartilage stress appears lower using distalization as opposed to distalization + tenodesis in this finite-element analysis simulation. An Insall-Salvati ratio of 0.95 may be an ideal level for distalization; further distalization does not show additional benefits.
This study suggests that distalization may result in less stress than distalization + tenodesis, therefore future clinical research might be preferentially directed toward evaluating isolated distalization procedures.
与高位髌骨相关的髌股关节对线不良可能导致疼痛和关节炎;因此,这种情况有时需要手术治疗。两种常见的手术是胫骨结节远移术,可伴有或不伴有髌腱固定术。然而,这些干预措施对高位髌骨的生物力学影响尚不清楚。
问题/目的:我们评估了胫骨结节远移术以及胫骨结节远移术联合髌腱固定术后髌股关节接触力学的变化。具体而言,我们提出以下问题:(1)这两种手术方式在生物力学上有差异吗?(2)髌骨远移的理想范围是多少?
为10例高位髌骨患者(平均Insall-Salvati比率为1.34±0.05)建立了个体特异性有限元模型。有限元模型的输入参数包括个体特异性关节几何形状、股四头肌力量以及负重髌股关节运动学。进行虚拟手术以模拟这两种手术。对于远移术,基于原始模型,将胫骨结节和髌骨以4毫米的增量向远侧移位4毫米至20毫米。在每个远移水平,将髌腱重新附着到其原始附着点以模拟额外的固定术。对两种手术方式以及不同远移水平之间的软骨应力、接触面积和接触力进行量化和比较。
与1.02±0.11兆帕的基线相比,远移术和远移术+固定术降低了髌股关节应力。远移术导致的软骨应力低于远移术+固定术,且效应量相对较大(0.88±0.10兆帕对0.92±0.10兆帕;平均差异为0.04兆帕[95%可信区间,0.02兆帕 - 0.05兆帕],p < 0.01;效应量为1.64[Cohen's d],Insall-Salvati比率降至0.95)。对于这两种手术,当Insall-Salvati比率接近0.95时,应力降低趋势趋于平稳。
在该有限元分析模拟中,与远移术+固定术相比,远移术的软骨应力似乎更低。Insall-Salvati比率为0.95可能是远移术的理想水平;进一步远移并无额外益处。
本研究表明,远移术可能比远移术+固定术导致的应力更小,因此未来的临床研究可能会优先针对评估单纯远移术进行。