Palpation and fluoroscopy are valid but unreliable for the assessment of femoral tunnel position after medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the validity and reliability of two techniques, palpation and fluoroscopy, for assessing medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction femoral tunnel position accuracy. METHODS: Twenty-one fresh frozen cadaveric knees had an MPFL femoral tunnel drilled and filled with a metal screw. Tunnels were created in a nonstandard fashion to ensure the sample included a range of tunnel positions from poor to ideal. Six experienced sport medicine and arthroscopy surgeons evaluated the placement of the femoral tunnel by palpating the screw in relation to anatomic landmarks and by fluoroscopy related to Schöttle's Point. They evaluated 1) the accuracy of femoral tunnel placement, 2) the direction of tunnel error, and 3) the clinical acceptability of the tunnel position. Validity measures included sensitivity, specificity, and correlation to clinical acceptability, which were calculated for the palpation and fluoroscopic assessments. Reliability measures included interrater reliability (ICC 2,k) for femoral tunnel accuracy and percent agreement of the raters' tunnel direction assessment. RESULTS: The palpation method demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.79 and specificity of 0.84 for assessing the accuracy of femoral tunnel placement, while the fluoroscopic method showed a sensitivity of 0.83 and specificity of 0.92. Pearson correlation coefficients for clinical acceptability of tunnel position were high, with both techniques ranging from .589 to .854. Interrater reliability for the palpation and fluoroscopic techniques for assessment of tunnel accuracy were 0.31 and 0.55 (ICC 2,k), respectively. Assessment of the direction of tunnel error was good with the fluoroscopic technique slightly more accurate than palpation. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that both palpation and fluoroscopy are valid techniques for assessing femoral tunnel position after MPFL reconstruction. Despite demonstrating good validity, the accuracy of assessing tunnel position was unreliable in a group of six experienced knee surgeons. Further research into MPFL reconstruction femoral tunnel assessment techniques, including patient-specific reference standards, is warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 2.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".