{"title":"Derotational distal femoral osteotomy yields better outcomes in patellar subluxation with proximal femoral torsion compared with distal femoral torsion: A retrospective comparative study.","authors":"Yanfeng Jia, Hongwei Bao, Jingzhao Hou, Ran Sun, Zhao Wang, Junjie Jiang, Xiaofeng Wang, Leilei Zhai","doi":"10.1186/s13018-024-05123-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Controversy exists regarding the origin of femoral torsion, and specific treatment rules regarding the optimal position of femoral osteotomy in patients with recurrent patellar subluxation and excessive femoral torsion are scarce.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To establish a novel classification system for such patients, and to compare clinical and radiological outcomes after distal derotational femoral osteotomy (DDFO) between femoral torsion at proximal (neck and shaft) and distal levels.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between January 2014 and June 2019, patients who underwent DDFO were retrospectively reviewed. The segmental torsion analysis was performed to establish a novel classification system, and classify included patients into two groups: 35 patients in proximal torsion group and 38 patients in distal torsion group. These patients were followed-up for at least 3 years. Clinical evaluations included functional outcomes, physical examinations, quality of life, activity level, satisfaction, and complications. Radiological outcomes included patellofemoral osteoarthritis, congruence, and alignment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Type I was defined as the proximal torsion. Type II was defined as the distal torsion. Proximal torsion group had lower postoperative femoral torsion (12.6 ± 2.6° vs. 14.8 ± 3.6°; P = .004) and higher surgical correction angle (21.6 ± 5.0° vs. 19.1 ± 3.0°; P = .009). All clinical and radiological outcomes improved significantly in both groups, but proximal torsion group had significantly higher quality of life (EQ-5D-5L: 0.96 ± 0.06 vs. 0.91 ± 0.07; P = .003.</p><p><strong>Eq-vas: </strong>92.0 ± 6.0 vs. 88.7 ± 5.8; P = .021) and Tegner activity score (5.2 ± 1.5 vs. 4.5 ± 1.4; P = .040), and fewer patellofemoral osteoarthritis (8.6% vs. 26.3%; P = .048). Two patients in the distal torsion group had subjective patellar instability. The percentage of patients with anterior knee pain was higher in the distal torsion group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A novel classification system for patients with recurrent patellar subluxation and excessive femoral torsion based on segmental femoral torsion analysis was established. DDFO was more appropriate for patients with proximal torsion, yielding higher surgical correction angle, and better clinical and radiological outcomes.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.</p>","PeriodicalId":16629,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11462965/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-05123-x","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Controversy exists regarding the origin of femoral torsion, and specific treatment rules regarding the optimal position of femoral osteotomy in patients with recurrent patellar subluxation and excessive femoral torsion are scarce.
Purpose: To establish a novel classification system for such patients, and to compare clinical and radiological outcomes after distal derotational femoral osteotomy (DDFO) between femoral torsion at proximal (neck and shaft) and distal levels.
Methods: Between January 2014 and June 2019, patients who underwent DDFO were retrospectively reviewed. The segmental torsion analysis was performed to establish a novel classification system, and classify included patients into two groups: 35 patients in proximal torsion group and 38 patients in distal torsion group. These patients were followed-up for at least 3 years. Clinical evaluations included functional outcomes, physical examinations, quality of life, activity level, satisfaction, and complications. Radiological outcomes included patellofemoral osteoarthritis, congruence, and alignment.
Results: Type I was defined as the proximal torsion. Type II was defined as the distal torsion. Proximal torsion group had lower postoperative femoral torsion (12.6 ± 2.6° vs. 14.8 ± 3.6°; P = .004) and higher surgical correction angle (21.6 ± 5.0° vs. 19.1 ± 3.0°; P = .009). All clinical and radiological outcomes improved significantly in both groups, but proximal torsion group had significantly higher quality of life (EQ-5D-5L: 0.96 ± 0.06 vs. 0.91 ± 0.07; P = .003.
Eq-vas: 92.0 ± 6.0 vs. 88.7 ± 5.8; P = .021) and Tegner activity score (5.2 ± 1.5 vs. 4.5 ± 1.4; P = .040), and fewer patellofemoral osteoarthritis (8.6% vs. 26.3%; P = .048). Two patients in the distal torsion group had subjective patellar instability. The percentage of patients with anterior knee pain was higher in the distal torsion group.
Conclusion: A novel classification system for patients with recurrent patellar subluxation and excessive femoral torsion based on segmental femoral torsion analysis was established. DDFO was more appropriate for patients with proximal torsion, yielding higher surgical correction angle, and better clinical and radiological outcomes.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research is an open access journal that encompasses all aspects of clinical and basic research studies related to musculoskeletal issues.
Orthopaedic research is conducted at clinical and basic science levels. With the advancement of new technologies and the increasing expectation and demand from doctors and patients, we are witnessing an enormous growth in clinical orthopaedic research, particularly in the fields of traumatology, spinal surgery, joint replacement, sports medicine, musculoskeletal tumour management, hand microsurgery, foot and ankle surgery, paediatric orthopaedic, and orthopaedic rehabilitation. The involvement of basic science ranges from molecular, cellular, structural and functional perspectives to tissue engineering, gait analysis, automation and robotic surgery. Implant and biomaterial designs are new disciplines that complement clinical applications.
JOSR encourages the publication of multidisciplinary research with collaboration amongst clinicians and scientists from different disciplines, which will be the trend in the coming decades.