4.5 Article

The relationship between quadriceps angle and tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance in patients with patellar instability

Journal

KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY
Volume 20, Issue 12, Pages 2399-2404

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00167-012-1907-8

Keywords

Patellar instability; Q-angle; TT-TG distance; Correlation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The quadriceps angle (Q-angle) represents the angle between the vector of action of the quadriceps and the patellar tendon. An increased Q-angle has been associated with an increased risk of patellar instability, although there is disagreement on its reliability and validity as it is affected by the position of the limb and contraction of the quadriceps. Tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance (TT-TG) is ascertained by axial CT scanning, with an increased value associated with patellar instability. This study aimed to determine whether the Q-angle correlates with the TT-TG distance in patients with patellar instability. Q-angles were measured in 34 knees that had previously undergone CT scanning for assessment of patellar instability. Measurements were made with the patient supine, the knee extended and the lower limbs in neutral rotation with the quadriceps relaxed and contracted. TT-TG distance was measured on CT scanning in an identical position. Of the 34 knees measured, 24 had symptoms of patellar instability, and 10 were normal. A significant negative correlation between relaxed Q-angle and TT-TG in all knees was demonstrated (p = 0.028). In symptomatic knees, contracted Q-angle also demonstrated a significant negative correlation with TT-TG (p = 0.037). If TT-TG distance is regarded as the gold standard measurement, Q-angle is not a reliable indicator of patellar instability. There is a clear need to develop methods to more fully characterise the knee and factors contributing to patellar instability. II.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available