Skip to main content
Log in

Does tibial tuberosity–trochlear groove distance (TT–TG) correlate with knee size or body height?

  • Knee
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Purpose

Since excessive tibial tuberosity–trochlear groove distance (TT–TG) is one of the major risk factors for patellofemoral instability, TT–TG is an often-used parameter in knee realignment surgery. Up to date, TT–TG is measured and interpreted using absolute values, disregarding the knee size of the individual. It was hypothesized that there is a relation between TT–TG and knee size and body height, respectively.

Methods

Consecutive MRI scans of 120 knee joints were analysed retrospectively. Of these, 60 MRI scans were obtained from patients with trochlear dysplasia and another 60 MRI scans were acquired from patients presenting with a different pathology of the knee joint. TT–TG was measured and TD was classified into low and high grade. Interepicondylar distance as an expression of knee size was measured on transverse MRI slices presenting the maximal distance from the medial to the lateral epicondylus. TT–TG was correlated with interepicondylar distance and body height.

Results

Interepicondylar distance as an expression of knee size correlated highly with body height in the control group with normal trochlea (r = 0.78) as well as in the TD group (r = 0.69). Correlation of TT–TG with interepicondylar distance or body height in the control group as well as in the TD group showed poor values with r < 0.30 (range r = 0.072–0.28).

Conclusion

TT–TG seems associated neither with the size of the individual knee, nor with body height. For this reason, TT–TG has to be considered as very individual parameter in knee realignment surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Balcarek P, Jung K, Frosch KH, Stürmer KM (2011) Value of the tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance in patellar instability in the young athlete. Am J Sports Med 39(8):1756–1761

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Camp CL, Stuart MJ, Krych AJ, Levy BA, Bond JR, Collins MS, Dahm DL (2013) CT and MRI measurements of tibial tubercle-trochlear groove distances are not equivalent in patients with patellar instability. Am J Sports Med 41(8):1835–1840

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Dejour D, Saggin P (2010) The sulcus deepening trochleoplasty—the Lyon’s procedure. Int Orthop 34(2):311–316

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Dejour H, Walch G, Nove-Josserand L, Guier CH (1994) Factors of patellar instability: an anatomic radiographic study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2:19–26

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Dietrich TJ, Betz M, Pfirrmann CW, Koch PP, Fucentese SF (2014) End-stage extension and its influence on the tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance (TTTG) in asymptomatic volunteers. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22(1):214–218

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Goutallier D, Bernageau J, Lecudonnec B (1978) The measurement of the tibial tuberosity-patella groove distanced technique and results (author’s transl). Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 64(5):423–428

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Izadpanah K, Weitzel E, Vicari M, Hennig J, Weigel M, Suedkamp NP, Niemeyer P (2014) 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 22(11):2655–2661

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Koeter S, Diks MJF, Anderson PG, Wymenga AB (2007) A modified tibial tubercle osteotomy for patellar maltracking. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89(2):180–185

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. McNally EG, Osterle SJ, Pal C (2000) Assessment of patellar maltracking using combined static and dynamic MRI. Eur Radiol 10:1051–1055

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Pandit S, Frampton C, Stoddart J, Lynskey T (2001) Magnetic resonance imaging assessment of tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance: normal values for males and females. Int Orthop 35(12):1799–1803

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Pennock AT, Alam M, Bastrom T (2014) Variation in tibial tubercle-trochlear groove measurement as a function of age, sex, size and patellar instability. Am J Sports Med 42(2):389–393

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Schoettle PB, Zanetti M, Seifert B, Pfirrmann CW, Fucentese SF, Romero J (2006) The tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance; a comparative study between CT and MRI scanning. Knee 13(1):26–31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Shelbourne KD, Kerr B (2001) The relationship of femoral intercondylar notch width to height, weight and sex in patients with intact anterior cruciate ligaments. Am J Knee Surg 14(2):92–96

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Tecklenburg K, Feller JA, Whitehead TS, Webster KE, Elzarka A (2010) Outcome of surgery for recurrent patellar dislocation based on the distance of the tibial tuberosity to the trochlear groove. J Bone Joint Surg Br 92(10):1376–1380

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Wittstein JR, Bartlett EC, Easterbrook J, Byrd JC (2006) Magnetic resonance imaging evaluation of patellofemoral malalignment. Arthroscopy 22(6):643–649

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel Dornacher.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dornacher, D., Reichel, H. & Kappe, T. Does tibial tuberosity–trochlear groove distance (TT–TG) correlate with knee size or body height?. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24, 2861–2867 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-015-3526-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-015-3526-7

Keywords

Navigation