Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 14, 2026

Four-Dimensional CT Analysis Using Sequential 3D-3D Registration
Published on: November 23, 2019
What Is the "Perfect" Lateral Radiograph? Effects of Beam Directionality and Condylar Alignment on the Perceived
Benjamin T Johnson1, Ameen Z Khalil1, Joseph Featherall1
1Department of Orthopaedics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
Background:
The identification of the medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) insertion site relies heavily on the use of radiographic landmarks such as the Schöttle point. However, little is known on how the variation in condylar alignment and beam directionality affects this perceived location.
Purpose:
To quantify changes in the perceived MPFL insertion site when posterior proximal or posterior distal condylar alignment is optimized and when fluoroscopic beam directionality alters.
Study Design:
Controlled laboratory study.
Methods:
A total of 16 cadaveric knees were included. The femoral insertion of the MPFL was identified and fixed with a radiopaque metal marker after dissection. Fluoroscopic images in the medial-to-lateral (ML) direction were taken with the posterior proximal condyles aligned and then with the posterior distal condyles aligned. Beam directionality was flipped to the lateral-to-medial (LM) direction, and images with posterior proximal and posterior distal condylar alignment were taken. Images were then superimposed onto the reference image, with discrepancies between marker locations quantified in the x- and y-axis. The 2-tailed Student t test was performed on all obtained variations.
Results:
In the ML direction, proximal versus distal alignment resulted in a mean proximal displacement of 0.43 ± 1.86 mm (P = .37) and a mean posterior displacement of -0.11 ± 0.55 mm (P = .42). In the LM direction, proximal versus distal alignment resulted in a mean proximal displacement of 1.95 ± 2.37 mm (P = .005) and a mean anterior displacement of 0.22 ± 1.95 mm (P = .67). When comparing ML to LM beam directionality with optimized proximal condylar alignment, there was a mean distal displacement of -0.26 ± 1.73 mm (P = .56) and a mean anterior displacement of 2.22 ± 1.87 mm (P < .001). When comparing ML to LM beam directionality with optimized distal condylar alignment, there was a mean proximal displacement of 1.26 ± 2.53 mm (P = .07) and a mean anterior displacement of 2.55 ± 1.71 mm (P < .001).
Conclusion:
Beam directionality and condylar alignment affected the perceived location of the MPFL insertion. However, shooting in the ML direction and aligning the posterior proximal femoral condyles resulted in the least amount of total variation. Future studies are needed to determine the amount of variation in perceived MPFL insertion sites that are clinically significant.
Clinical Relevance:
This information provides surgeons with the insight that beam directionality and condylar alignment significantly affect the perceived location of the MPFL insertion site and that surgeons can use fluoroscopic imaging in the ML direction with posterior proximal condylar alignment to minimize image variation.
More Related Videos
06:27Author Spotlight: Investigating Early Events and Long-Term Effects of ACL Injuries for Osteoarthritis Progression
Published on: September 29, 2023
07:09In situ Compressive Loading and Correlative Noninvasive Imaging of the Bone-periodontal Ligament-tooth Fibrous Joint
Published on: March 7, 2014
Related Concept Videos
Bones of the Lower Limb: Femur and Patella
Beams with Unsymmetric Loadings
The first moment-area theorem determines the slope at any point on the beam. This theorem indicates that the change in slope between two points on a beam...