Patellofemoral instability: classification and imaging.

Massimo Berruto, Paolo Ferrua, Giulia Carimati, Francesco Uboldi, Luca Gala
Author Information
  1. Massimo Berruto: Section of Knee Surgery, G. Pini Hospital, Milan, Italy.
  2. Paolo Ferrua: Section of Knee Surgery, G. Pini Hospital, Milan, Italy.
  3. Giulia Carimati: Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
  4. Francesco Uboldi: Section of Knee Surgery, G. Pini Hospital, Milan, Italy.
  5. Luca Gala: Section of Knee Surgery, G. Pini Hospital, Milan, Italy.

Abstract

Patellofemoral disorders must be approached through an appropriate process of diagnostic framing, performed using language that is, as far as possible, unequivocal and a validated and organic classification system. At present, the classification proposed by the Lyonnaise school, which fulfills these requirements, is the most complete. This classification divides patellofemoral disorders into three groups: objective patellar instability, potential patellar instability and painful patella syndrome. It also identifies three principal factors of instability: trochlear dysplasia, abnormal patellar height and pathological tibial tubercle-trochlear groove (TT-TG) distance. Imaging is crucial for correct classification and for identifying and measuring the principal factors of instability. Up to now, the emphasis has been placed on the contribution made by traditional diagnostic radiology and computed tomography. In recent years, however, growing attention has been paid to the use of magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of the patellofemoral joint and in the study of factors of instability, even though there is still a need for validation of this approach before it can be routinely used in preoperative planning.

Keywords

References

  1. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1982;68(5):317-25 [PMID: 6216535]
  2. Radiology. 2000 Aug;216(2):582-5 [PMID: 10924589]
  3. Arthroscopy. 2006 Jun;22(6):643-9 [PMID: 16762703]
  4. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1978 Jul-Aug;64(5):423-8 [PMID: 152950]
  5. Knee. 2006 Jan;13(1):26-31 [PMID: 16023858]
  6. Knee. 2002 Feb;9(1):3-6 [PMID: 11830373]
  7. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2008 Oct;16(10):911-5 [PMID: 18553069]
  8. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1995;81(6):497-504 [PMID: 8560020]
  9. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1977 May;59(2):241-2 [PMID: 873986]
  10. Skeletal Radiol. 1993 Aug;22(6):403-10 [PMID: 8248813]
  11. Skeletal Radiol. 2004 Aug;33(8):445-50 [PMID: 15221214]
  12. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979 Oct;(144):16-26 [PMID: 535219]
  13. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 1994;2(1):19-26 [PMID: 7584171]
  14. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996 Aug;167(2):339-41 [PMID: 8686598]
  15. Knee. 2008 Jan;15(1):3-8 [PMID: 18023186]
  16. Radiology. 1971 Oct;101(1):101-4 [PMID: 5111961]
  17. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1998 May-Jun;8(3):724-32 [PMID: 9626893]
  18. Knee. 2005 Dec;12(6):447-53 [PMID: 15967667]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0classificationinstabilitypatellarpatellofemoralfactorsimagingPatellofemoraldisordersdiagnosticthreeprincipalinstability:TT-TGmustapproachedappropriateprocessframingperformedusinglanguagefarpossibleunequivocalvalidatedorganicsystempresentproposedLyonnaiseschoolfulfillsrequirementscompletedividesgroups:objectivepotentialpainfulpatellasyndromealsoidentifiestrochleardysplasiaabnormalheightpathologicaltibialtubercle-trochleargroovedistanceImagingcrucialcorrectidentifyingmeasuringnowemphasisplacedcontributionmadetraditionalradiologycomputedtomographyrecentyearshowevergrowingattentionpaidusemagneticresonanceassessmentjointstudyeventhoughstillneedvalidationapproachcanroutinelyusedpreoperativeplanning

Similar Articles

Cited By