Open Lateral Patellar Retinacular Lengthening Versus Open Retinacular Release in Lateral Patellar Hypercompression Syndrome: A Prospective Double-Blinded Comparative Study on Complications and Outcome

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospital of Basel, Spitalstrasse 21, Basel, Switzerland.
Arthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery (Impact Factor: 3.19). 01/2012; 28(6):788-97. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2011.11.004
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To compare complication rates and outcome of open lateral retinacular (LR) lengthening and open LR release in the treatment of lateral patellar hypercompression syndrome (LPHS).
In a prospective double-blinded study, 28 patients (mean age, 48 years; 21 women and 7 men) received either LR release (14 patients) or LR lengthening (14 patients) in alternating fashion over the same lateral parapatellar skin incision for LPHS (blinding of patients to surgical procedure [i.e., single blinding]). Strict inclusion criteria (retinacular pain, tight retinaculum, decreased patellar mobility) were used to exclude other reasons for anterior knee pain (patellar instability, leg malalignment or maltorsion, trochlear dysplasia, patella alta). The surgeon and postsurgical rehabilitation were the same. Preoperatively and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively, complications, muscle atrophy, and Kujala patellofemoral outcome score were documented by examiners blinded to the surgical procedure (double blinding). All patients completed 2 years of follow-up.
The results of 2 years of follow-up showed that recurrence of LPHS, as indicated by the patellar tilt test and decreased medial patellar glide test, developed in 2 cases after LR release and 1 case after LR lengthening (P > .999). Medial patellar subluxation, as indicated by the gravitation-subluxation test and increased medial patellar glide test, developed in 5 cases after LR release and no case after LR lengthening (P = .041). Quadriceps atrophy, as indicated by the mean circumference difference compared with the healthy contralateral side, was significantly higher (P = .001) in the LR release group (1.8 cm) than in the LR lengthening group (0.2 cm). The mean Kujala score was significantly lower (P = .035) in the LR release group (77.2 points) than in the LR lengthening group (88.4 points).
In this prospective double-blinded study, retinacular lengthening showed less medial instability, less quadriceps atrophy, and a better clinical outcome at 2 years compared with retinacular release. We believe that this may be explained by the controlled preservation of the lateral patellar muscle-capsuloligamentous continuity after retinacular lengthening.
Level II, prospective double-blinded comparative study.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Management of patellofemoral joint pathology is challenging as a result of the unique and complex organization of static forces and dynamic factors contributing to its functional capacity. Anterior knee pain is a common musculoskeletal complaint seen daily in the practices of primary care physicians, rheumatologists, and orthopedic surgeons. The key to successful treatment lies not only in the correct diagnosis of a chondral defect, but more importantly, in the accurate identification of associated pathomechanical factors. Appreciating the pathoanatomic basis of the disease and addressing imbalances and anatomical abnormalities should guide treatment. Despite the complexity of the interplay of various components it is essential to attempt to describe patellar malalignement as a clinical entity in order to proceed with appropriate surgical management and successful outcomes. The goals of patellofemoral re- alignment surgery should be to create both a stable environment for optimal extensor mechanism performance and an appropriate load transmission for optimal cartilage wear and joint loading. In the context of this article we will review the operative management of patellofemoral malalignment; the indications for surgery, the different techniques available and the evidence regarding their effectiveness. A large number of procedures have been employed and they have all undergone various modifications over the course of the years. The majority of publications are retrospective series in poorly defined population groups. There are significant methodological inconsistencies and as a result there is lack of strong evidence base for the majority of these procedures.
    The Open Orthopaedics Journal 07/2012; 6:327-39. DOI:10.2174/1874325001206010327
  • Arthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery 03/2013; 29(3):403. DOI:10.1016/j.arthro.2013.01.002 · 3.19 Impact Factor
  • Arthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery 03/2013; 29(3):404. DOI:10.1016/j.arthro.2013.01.001 · 3.19 Impact Factor