Outcome | Illustrative comparative risks | No of participants (studies) | |
---|---|---|---|
Assumed risk | Corresponding risk (95% CI) | ||
On same knee | |||
Distance of aperture to FP | Â | Â | Â |
On photographed arthroscopic image On digitized 3d model of specimen On CT | 6.2Â mm 5.9Â mm NE | 3.4Â mm closer (3.6Â mm closer:3.2Â mm closer) 3.6Â mm closer (8.3Â mm closer:1.1Â mm further) NEb | 20 (1 study) 48 (2 studiesa) 59 (2 studies) |
Distance of aperture to FP in PA axis | Â | Â | Â |
On specimen On digitized 3d model | 1.9Â mm anterior 3.7Â mm anterior | 1.9Â mm more posterior 3.3Â mm more posterior (6.2Â mm more posterior:0.3Â mm more posterior) | 10 (1 study) 48 (2 studies) |
Distance of aperture to FP in PD axis | Â | Â | Â |
On specimen On digitized 3d model | 3.3Â mm proximal 2.9Â mm proximal | 3.3Â mm more distal 2.9Â mm more distal (6.1Â mm more distal:0.3Â mm more proximal) | 10 (1 study) 48 (2 studies) |
Aperture spatial position in FP | Â | Â | Â |
On specimen On CT | 100% in highest third Variable, 50% in lower deep quadrant | 30% in highest, 50% in middle, and 20% in lower third Consistent, 70% in lower deep quadrant | 20 (1 study) 20 (1 study) |
On contralateral knee on MRI | |||
Greatest distance of aperture to FP | 4Â mm | 1.3Â mm closer (6Â mm closer:3.4Â mm further) | 87 (3 studies) |
Distance of aperture to FP in PA axis | 3.7Â mm anterior | 3.5Â mm more posterior (8.2Â mm more posterior:1.2Â mm more anterior) | 46 (2 studies) |
Distance of aperture to FP in DP axis | 0.4Â mm proximal | 1.6Â mm more distal (6Â mm more distal:2.9Â mm more proximal) | 46 (2 studies) |
Difference in AP position% between aperture and FP | 9% anterior | 2% more posterior (5% more anterior: 9% more posterior) | 20 (1 study) |
Difference in DP position% between aperture and FP | 9% proximal | 10% more distal (18.9% more distal:1.1% more distal) | 20 (1 study) |