HSS Journal ®

, Volume 8, Issue 2, pp 92–95 | Cite as

MRI Diagnosis of Patellar Clunk Syndrome Following Total Knee Arthroplasty

  • Thomas J. Heyse
  • Le Roy Chong
  • Jack Davis
  • Steven B. Haas
  • Mark P. Figgie
  • Hollis G. Potter
Original Article

Abstract

Background

Patellar Clunk Syndrome is a painful condition associated with a mechanical catching or clunking during active extension following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The syndrome is caused by growth of interposing soft tissue usually at the superior pole of the patella. This interposed soft tissue cannot be visualized on plain radiographs.

Questions

The aim was to ascertain if magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) would prove helpful in confirming the clinical diagnosis of patellar clunk by visualizing the interposed soft tissues adjacent to the patella and that the recognition of this tissue would be highly reproducible.

Methods

MRI scans of 12 patients with clinical suspicion or related symptoms of a patellar clunk syndrome following primary TKA were retrospectively evaluated. Size of soft tissue masses proximal to the patella were determined in sagittal and axial MRI views. Largest diameters were recorded in two dimensions by two independent observers, and interobserver reliability was determined by intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC).

Results

Nine patients (75%) showed obvious MRI findings consistent with a patellar clunk lesion with high interobserver reliability (ICC values >0.75). In eight patients, this lead to operative treatment with arthroscopic debridement.

Discussion

MRI helps confirm the clinical diagnosis of patellar clunk. The data indicate that MRI is effective in defining the soft tissue lesion that is implicated in clinically evident patellar clunk syndrome after TKA.

Keywords

patellar clunk TKA MRI total knee arthroplasty magnet resonance imaging 

References

  1. 1.
    Beight JL, Yao B, Hozack WJ, Hearn SL, Booth RE, Jr.: The patellar "clunk" syndrome after posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1994(299): 139–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Carpenter RD, Brilhault J, Majumdar S, Ries MD. Magnetic resonance imaging of in vivo patellofemoral kinematics after total knee arthroplasty. Knee 2009; 16(5): 332–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Figgie HE, 3 rd, Goldberg VM, Heiple KG, Moller HS, 3 rd, Gordon NH: The influence of tibial-patellofemoral location on function of the knee in patients with the posterior stabilized condylar knee prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1986; 68(7): 1035–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hozack WJ, Rothman RH, Booth RE, Jr., Balderston RA: The patellar clunk syndrome. A complication of posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989(241): 203–8.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Insall JN, Binazzi R, Soudry M, Mestriner LA: Total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1985(192): 13–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Insall JN, Lachiewicz PF, Burstein AH: The posterior stabilized condylar prosthesis: a modification of the total condylar design. Two to four-year clinical experience. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1982; 64(9): 1317–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lee KY, Slavinsky JP, Ries MD, Blumenkrantz G, Majumdar S: Magnetic resonance imaging of in vivo kinematics after total knee arthroplasty. J Magn Reson Imaging 2005; 21(2): 172–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mosher TJ, Davis CM, 3 rd: Magnetic resonance imaging to evaluate osteolysis around total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2006; 21(3): 460–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Potter HG, Foo LF: Magnetic resonance imaging of joint arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 2006; 37(3): 361–73, vi-vii.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Raphael B, Haims AH, Wu JS, Katz LD, White LM, Lynch K: MRI comparison of periprosthetic structures around zirconium knee prostheses and cobalt chrome prostheses. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006; 186(6): 1771–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sharkey PF, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH, Shastri S, Jacoby SM: Insall Award paper. Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002(404): 7–13.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Simison AJ, Noble J, Hardinge K: Complications of the Attenborough knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1986; 68(1): 100–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sofka CM, Potter HG, Figgie M, Laskin R: Magnetic resonance imaging of total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2003(406): 129–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vernace JV, Rothman RH, Booth RE, Jr., Balderston RA: Arthroscopic management of the patellar clunk syndrome following posterior stabilized total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1989; 4(2): 179–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vessely MB, Frick MA, Oakes D, Wenger DE, Berry DJ: Magnetic resonance imaging with metal suppression for evaluation of periprosthetic osteolysis after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2006; 21(6): 826–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Hospital for Special Surgery 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas J. Heyse
    • 1
  • Le Roy Chong
    • 2
  • Jack Davis
    • 2
  • Steven B. Haas
    • 2
  • Mark P. Figgie
    • 2
  • Hollis G. Potter
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Orthopedics and RheumatologyUniversity Hospital MarburgMarburgGermany
  2. 2.Hospital for Special SurgeryNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations