LAUSR.org creates dashboard-style pages of related content for over 1.5 million academic articles. Sign Up to like articles & get recommendations!

Revision surgery for failed medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction results in better disease-specific outcome scores when performed for recurrent instability than for patellofemoral pain or limited range of motion

Photo from wikipedia

Medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction (MPFL-R) is an important treatment for recurrent patellar instability. Although complications such as redislocation, patellofemoral pain (PFP) and restricted knee range of motion have been reported,… Click to show full abstract

Medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction (MPFL-R) is an important treatment for recurrent patellar instability. Although complications such as redislocation, patellofemoral pain (PFP) and restricted knee range of motion have been reported, few studies have investigated the results of revision surgery for failed MPFL-R. Thus, the aim of this study was to determine the results of the tailored revision surgery after considering the cause of the reconstruction failure. Between 2015 and 2019, 28 patients (male/female 9/19; age 26.2 ± 6.4 years) underwent revision surgery for failed MPFL-R. The patients were grouped into the “recurrent instability” (SG1) group and “PFP” and/or “restricted range of motion” (SG2) group. Preoperatively, the clinical data, anatomical risk factor profile, and position of the femoral MPFL tunnel were determined for each patient. The Banff Patella Instability Instrument 2.0 (BPII 2.0) and numerical analogue scale (NAS 0–10) were administered preoperatively and at the final follow-up for the subjective assessment of the PFP and knee joint function. Overall, the BPII 2.0 score improved from 28.8 ± 16.6 points preoperatively to 68.0 ± 22.7 points (p < 0.0001) postoperatively. SG1 exhibited an increase in the BPII 2.0 score from 28.9 ± 20.2 points to 75.7 ± 23 points (p < 0.0001). PFP decreased from 6.8 ± 2.4 to 1.6 ± 1.9 (p < 0.0001), while the knee joint function increased from 4.3 ± 2.5 to 8.8 ± 1.6 (p < 0.0001). In SG2, the BPII 2.0 score increased from 28.7 ± 12.6 points preoperatively to 57.7 ± 19.7 points (p = 0.0002) postoperatively and was thus significantly lower than that in SG1 (p = 0.038). The intensity of PFP decreased from 6.6 ± 3.0 preoperatively to 2.1 ± 1.9 postoperatively (p = 0.0006), while the subjective knee joint function improved from 3.2 ± 1.4 preoperatively to 7.6 ± 2.3 postoperatively (p < 0.0001). The differences between the groups were not significant. Tailored revision surgery for failed MPFL-R significantly improves the patient-reported disease-specific quality of life. The study results indicate that patients undergoing revision surgery as a consequence of patellar redislocation appear to benefit more from revision surgery than those patients undergoing revision due to postoperative PFP and/or a limited knee joint range of motion. Level IV.

Keywords: surgery; revision; range motion; surgery failed; revision surgery; instability

Journal Title: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
Year Published: 2021

Link to full text (if available)


Share on Social Media:                               Sign Up to like & get
recommendations!

Related content

More Information              News              Social Media              Video              Recommended



                Click one of the above tabs to view related content.