Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Skeletal Radiology
Published in: Skeletal Radiology 4/2021

01-04-2021 | Magnetic Resonance Imaging | Scientific Article

Measurement of tibial tuberosity—trochlear groove distance by MRI: assessment and correction of knee positioning errors

Authors: Niels Egund, Nikolaj Skou, Bjarke Jacobsen, Anne Grethe Jurik

Published in: Skeletal Radiology | Issue 4/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

The tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove (TTTG) distance varies with the position of the knee in the MR or CT scanner. We present and assess a simple method for adjustment of adduction or abduction of the knee.

Materials and methods

MRI of the knee encompassing a three-dimensional (3D) sagittal sequence including ≥ 8 cm of the proximal tibia was analyzed (29 females, 17 males; median age 45 years). Using 3D visualization software, the central longitudinal axis of the proximal tibia (TA) was constructed, and the TTTG distance was measured before and after alignment of the TA. Observer reliability was assessed with inter- and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman plots.

Results

Adduction of the knee occurred in 26 examinations, mean 2.7° (range 0.0° to 9.4°), and abduction in 20 examinations, mean 2.6° (range 0.0° to 7.2°). Following adjustment, the mean TTTG distance increased 2.4 mm (range 0.0 to 6.7 mm) in the knees positioned in adduction and decreased 2.3 mm when in abduction (range 0.0 to 5.5 mm). The correlation coefficient (r2) between the deviation in adduction and abduction and the difference between TTTG unadjusted and adjusted was r2 = 0.96. ICCs were excellent, but limits of agreement were close to ± 3 mm.

Conclusion

Measurement of the TTTG distance by MRI is influenced by a systematic technique-dependent error caused by knee positioning in adduction or abduction. We suggest a simple method for adjusting the positioning.
Literature
1.
Dejour H, Walch G, Nove-Josserand L, Guier C. Factors of patellar instability: an anatomic radiographic study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 1994;2(1):19–26.CrossRef
2.
Schoettle PB, Zanetti M, Seifert B, Pfirrmann CW, Fucentese SF, Romero J. The tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance; a comparative study between CT and MRI scanning. Knee. 2006;13(1):26–31.CrossRef
3.
Balcarek P, Ammon J, Frosch S, Walde TA, Schuttrumpf JP, Ferlemann KG, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging characteristics of the medial patellofemoral ligament lesion in acute lateral patellar dislocations considering trochlear dysplasia, patella alta, and tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance. Arthroscopy. 2010;26(7):926–35.CrossRef
4.
Williams AA, Elias JJ, Tanaka MJ, Thawait GK, Demehri S, Carrino JA, et al. The relationship between tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance and abnormal patellar tracking in patients with unilateral patellar instability. Arthroscopy. 2016;32(1):55–61.CrossRef
5.
Goutallier D, Bernageau J, Lecudonnec B. The measurement of the tibial tuberosity. Patella groove distanced technique and results (author's transl). Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1978;64(5):423–8.PubMed
6.
Brattström H. Shape of the intercondylar groove normally and in recurrent dislocation of patella. Acta OrthopScand. 1964;35(Suppl 68):1–148.
7.
Graf KH, Tompkins MA, Agel J, Arendt EA. Q-vector measurements: physical examination versus magnetic resonance imaging measurements and their relationship with tibial tubercle-trochlear groove distance. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018;26(3):697–704.CrossRef
8.
Pandit S, Frampton C, Stoddart J, Lynskey T. Magnetic resonance imaging assessment of tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance: normal values for males and females. Int Orthop. 2011;35(12):1799–803.CrossRef
9.
Matsushita T, Kuroda R, Oka S, Matsumoto T, Takayama K, Kurosaka M. Clinical outcomes of medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction in patients with an increased tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014;22(10):2438–44.CrossRef
10.
Arendt EA, Dejour D. Patella instability: building bridges across the ocean a historic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013;21(2):279–93.CrossRef
11.
Koeter S, Diks MJ, Anderson PG, Wymenga AB. A modified tibial tubercle osteotomy for patellar maltracking: results at two years. J Bone Joint Surg (Br). 2007;89(2):180–5.CrossRef
12.
Tecklenburg K, Feller JA, Whitehead TS, Webster KE, Elzarka A. Outcome of surgery for recurrent patellar dislocation based on the distance of the tibial tuberosity to the trochlear groove. J Bone Joint Surg (Br). 2010;92(10):1376–80.CrossRef
13.
Wilcox JJ, Snow BJ, Aoki SK, Hung M, Burks RT. Does landmark selection affect the reliability of tibial tubercle-trochlear groove measurements using MRI? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470(8):2253–60.CrossRef
14.
Tensho K, Akaoka Y, Shimodaira H, Takanashi S, Ikegami S, Kato H, et al. What components comprise the measurement of the tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance in a patellar dislocation population? J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97(17):1441–8.CrossRef
15.
Yin L, Chen C, Duan X, Deng B, Xiong R, Wang F, et al. Influence of the image levels of distal femur on the measurement of tibial tubercle-trochlear groove distance--a comparative study. J Orthop Surg Res. 2015;10:174,015-0323-4.
16.
Smith BW, Millar EA, Jones KC, Elias JJ. Variations in tibial tuberosity to trochlear groove and posterior cruciate ligament distances due to tibial external and valgus rotations. J Knee Surg. 2018;31(6):557–61.CrossRef
17.
Hochreiter B, Hess S, Moser L, Hirschmann MT, Amsler F, Behrend H. Healthy knees have a highly variable patellofemoral alignment: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020;28(2):398–406.CrossRef
18.
Dietrich TJ, Betz M, Pfirrmann CW, Koch PP, Fucentese SF. End-stage extension of the knee and its influence on tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance (TTTG) in asymptomatic volunteers. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014;22(1):214–8.CrossRef
19.
Camathias C, Pagenstert G, Stutz U, Barg A, Muller-Gerbl M, Nowakowski AM. The effect of knee flexion and rotation on the tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016;24(9):2811–7.CrossRef
20.
Marquez-Lara A, Andersen J, Lenchik L, Ferguson CM, Gupta P. Variability in patellofemoral alignment measurements on MRI: influence of knee position. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017;208(5):1097–102.CrossRef
21.
Yao L, Gai N, Boutin RD. Axial scan orientation and the tibial tubercle-trochlear groove distance: error analysis and correction. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202(6):1291–6.CrossRef
22.
Ho CP, James EW, Surowiec RK, Gatlin CC, Ellman MB, Cram TR, et al. Systematic technique-dependent differences in CT versus MRI measurement of the tibial tubercle-trochlear groove distance. Am J Sports Med. 2015;43(3):675–82.CrossRef
23.
Egund N, Palmer J. Femoral anatomy described in cylindrical coordinates using computed tomography. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh). 1984;25(3):209–15.CrossRef
24.
Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1(8476):307–10.CrossRef
25.
Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979;86(2):420–8.CrossRef
26.
Edholm P. Anatomic angles determined from two radiographic projections. Instrument description and measurement techniques. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh). 1966;(Suppl 259):1–86.
27.
Billing L. Roentgen examination of the proximal femur end in children and adolescents; a standardized technique also suitable for determination of the collum-, anteversion-, and epiphyseal angles; a study of slipped epiphysis and coxa plana. Acta Radiol Suppl. 1954;110:1–80.PubMed
28.
Berryman F, Pynsent P, McBryde C. A semi-automated method for measuring femoral shape to derive version and its comparison with existing methods. Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng. 2014;30(11):1314–25.CrossRef
29.
Hernandez RJ, Tachdjian MO, Poznanski AK, Dias LS. CT determination of femoral torsion. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1981;137(1):97–101.CrossRef
30.
Tomczak RJ, Guenther KP, Rieber A, Mergo P, Ros PR, Brambs HJ. MR imaging measurement of the femoral antetorsional angle as a new technique: comparison with CT in children and adults. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1997;168(3):791–4.CrossRef
31.
Camp CL, Stuart MJ, Krych AJ, Levy BA, Bond JR, Collins MS, et al. CT and MRI measurements of tibial tubercle-trochlear groove distances are not equivalent in patients with patellar instability. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41(8):1835-40.
32.
Anley CM, Morris GV, Saithna A, James SL, Snow M. Defining the role of the Tibial tubercle-trochlear groove and tibial tubercle-posterior cruciate ligament distances in the work-up of patients with patellofemoral disorders. Am J Sports Med. 2015;43(6):1348–53.CrossRef
33.
Brady JM, Sullivan JP, Nguyen J, Mintz D, Green DW, Strickland S, et al. The tibial tubercle-to-trochlear groove distance is reliable in the setting of trochlear dysplasia, and superior to the tibial tubercle-to-posterior cruciate ligament distance when evaluating coronal malalignment in oatellofemoral instability. Arthroscopy. 2017;33(11):2026–34.PubMed
34.
Zhang LK, Wang XM, Niu YZ, Liu HX, Wang F. Relationship between patellar tracking and the "screw-home" mechanism of tibiofemoral joint. Orthop Surg. 2016;8(4):490–5.CrossRef
35.
Izadpanah K, Weitzel E, Vicari M, Hennig J, Weigel M, Sudkamp NP, et al. Influence of knee flexion angle and weight bearing on the tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove (TTTG) distance for evaluation of patellofemoral alignment. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014;22(11):2655–61.CrossRef
36.
Suomalainen JS, Regalado G, Joukainen A, Kaariainen T, Kononen M, Manninen H, et al. Effects of knee flexion and extension on the tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove (TT-TG) distance in adolescents. J Exp Orthop. 2018;5(1):31,018-0149-1.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Measurement of tibial tuberosity—trochlear groove distance by MRI: assessment and correction of knee positioning errors
Authors
Niels Egund
Nikolaj Skou
Bjarke Jacobsen
Anne Grethe Jurik
Publication date
01-04-2021
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Skeletal Radiology / Issue 4/2021
Print ISSN: 0364-2348
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2161
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-020-03605-7

Other articles of this Issue 4/2021

Skeletal Radiology 4/2021 Go to the issue

Correction

Correction to: Characteristic MRI findings of shoulder, elbow, and wrist joints in wheelchair user

Scientific Article

Assessment of postoperative acromial and subacromial morphology after arthroscopic acromioplasty using magnetic resonance imaging

Scientific Article

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound-guided musculoskeletal biopsies: our experience and technique

Scientific Article

Safety and efficacy comparison of three- vs four-needle technique in the management of moderate to severe osteoarthritis of the knee using cooled radiofrequency ablation

Review Article

Tennis overuse injuries in the upper extremity

Scientific Article

Development of a technique for MRI gold-standard direct volumetric measurement of complex joint effusion, and validation at the hip