Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy

, Volume 25, Issue 10, pp 3163–3170 | Cite as

Morphological classification of the femoral trochlear groove based on a quantitative measurement of computed tomographic models

  • Shichang Chen
  • Zhe Du
  • Mengning Yan
  • Bing Yue
  • You Wang
Knee

Abstract

Purpose

This study aimed to investigate the natural morphology of the femoral trochlear groove based on quantitative measurement.

Methods

Computed tomographic femur models of 50 male and 50 female healthy Chinese adults (30–60 years) were analysed using three-dimensional software. Coaxial cutting planes (15° increments) rotating about the trochlear groove axis from the proximal to distal point were created, followed by the deepest point of the trochlear groove marked at each cross section. The shape, position, and orientation of the trochlear groove were analysed.

Results

The trochlear groove was located laterally relative to the mechanical axis and consisted of the laterally oriented proximal part and medially oriented distal part. Based on the turning points located on different cross sections, the trochlear groove was classified into four types: types 45°, 60°, 75°, and 90°. The mediolateral position relative to the mechanical axis was types 45°, 60°, 75°, and 90°, from the lateral to medial side, while the distal parts of them extended along the same path. The orientation of the trochlear groove was relatively consistent and smooth, which oriented at approximately 1° medially between two adjacent segments, except at approximately 10° medially at the turning point.

Conclusion

The trochlear groove tracking varies greatly amongst a population that is mainly categorized into four types. This study may be helpful for better understanding of the natural trochlear groove anatomy, prosthetic design modification, and provide the reference value for studying patellofemoral diseases such as patellar maltracking and trochlear dysplasia.

Level of evidence

Prospective study, Level II.

Keywords

Total knee arthroplasty Femoral trochlear groove Morphological analysis Computed tomography Chinese population 

References

  1. 1.
    Atzori F, Salama W, Sabatini L, Mousa S, Khalefa A (2016) Medial pivot knee in primary total knee arthroplasty. Ann Transl Med 4:6CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baldini A, Anderson JA, Cerulli-Mariani P, Kalyvas J, Pavlov H, Sculco TP (2007) Patellofemoral evaluation after total knee arthroplasty. Validation of a new weight-bearing axial radiographic view. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:1810–1817PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barink M, Meijerink H, Verdonschot N, van Kampen A, de Waal Malefijt M (2007) Asymmetrical total knee arthroplasty does not improve patella tracking: a study without patella resurfacing. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 15:184–191CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barink M, Van de Groes S, Verdonschot N, de Waal Malefijt M (2003) The trochlea is bilinear and oriented medially. Clin Orthop Relat Res 411:288–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Barink M, Van de Groes S, Verdonschot N, De Waal Malefijt M (2006) The difference in trochlear orientation between the natural knee and current prosthetic knee designs; towards a truly physiological prosthetic groove orientation. J Biomech 39:1708–1715CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dejour D, Ntagiopoulos PG, Saffarini M (2014) Evidence of trochlear dysplasia in femoral component designs. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22:2599–2607CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    D’Lima DD, Chen PC, Kester MA, Colwell CW Jr (2003) Impact of patellofemoral design on patellofemoral forces and polyethylene stresses. J Bone Joint Surg Am Suppl 4:85–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eisenhuth SA, Saleh KJ, Cui Q, Clark CR, Brown TE (2006) Patellofemoral instability after total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 446:149–160CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Freeman MA, Pinskerova V (2005) The movement of the normal tibio-femoral joint. J Biomech 38:197–208CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Iranpour F, Merican AM, Baena FR, Cobb JP, Amis AA (2010) Patellofemoral joint kinematics: the circular path of the patella around the trochlear axis. J Orthop Res 28:589–594PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Iranpour F, Merican AM, Dandachli W, Amis AA, Cobb JP (2010) The geometry of the trochlear groove. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:782–788CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kulkarni SK, Freeman MA, Poal-Manresa JC, Asencio JI, Rodriguez JJ (2000) The patellofemoral joint in total knee arthroplasty: is the design of the trochlea the critical factor? J Arthroplast 15:424–429CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kuriyama S, Hyakuna K, Inoue S, Tanaka Y, Tamaki Y, Ito H, Matsuda S (2014) Is a “sulcus cut” technique effective for determining the level of distal femoral resection in total knee arthroplasty? Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22:3060–3066CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lee TQ, Gerken AP, Glaser FE, Kim WC, Anzel SH (1997) Patellofemoral joint kinematics and contact pressures in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 340:257–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Meijerink HJ, Barink M, van Loon CJ, Schwering PJ, Donk RD, Verdonschot N, de Waal Malefijt MC (2007) The trochlea is medialized by total knee arthroplasty: an intraoperative assessment in 61 patients. Acta Orthop 78:123–127CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Patel J, Ries MD, Bozic KJ (2008) Extensor mechanism complications after total knee arthroplasty. Instr Course Lect 57:283–294PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Post WR (1999) Clinical evaluation of patients with patellofemoral disorders. Arthroscopy 15:841–851CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Powers CM (2000) Patellar kinematics, Part II: the influence of the depth of the trochlear groove in subjects with and without patellofemoral pain. Phys Ther 80:965–978PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schindler OS, Scott WN (2011) Basic kinematics and biomechanics of the patello-femoral joint. Part 1: the native patella. Acta Orthop Belg 77:421–431PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shih YF, Bull AM, Amis AA (2004) The cartilaginous and osseous geometry of the femoral trochlear groove. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 12:300–306CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stoddard JE, Deehan DJ, Bull AM, McCaskie AW, Amis AA (2014) No difference in patellar tracking between symmetrical and asymmetrical femoral component designs in TKA. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22:534–542CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Varadarajan KM, Gill TJ, Freiberg AA, Rubash HE, Li G (2009) Gender differences in trochlear groove orientation and rotational kinematics of human knees. J Orthop Res 27:871–878CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Varadarajan KM, Rubash HE, Li G (2011) Are current total knee arthroplasty implants designed to restore normal trochlear groove anatomy? J Arthroplast 26:274–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yue B, Varadarajan KM, Ai S, Tang T, Rubash HE, Li G (2011) Gender differences in the knees of Chinese population. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 19:80–88CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yue B, Wang J, Wang Y, Yan M, Zhang J, Zeng Y (2015) The intercondylar notch ceiling: an accurate reference for distal femoral resection in total knee arthroplasty for severely degenerated varus knees. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. doi:10.1007/s00167-015-3792-4 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, Arthroscopy (ESSKA) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shichang Chen
    • 2
  • Zhe Du
    • 1
  • Mengning Yan
    • 2
  • Bing Yue
    • 2
  • You Wang
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Shanghai Key Laboratory of Orthopaedic Implants, Ninth People’s HospitalShanghai Jiaotong University School of MedicineShanghaiChina
  2. 2.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Ninth People’s HospitalShanghai Jiaotong University School of MedicineShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations