Purpose To determine the most optimal surgical technique for medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction (MPFLR). Methods Three databases MEDLINE, PubMed, and EMBASE were searched from inception to December 13 th , 2022, for level I or II studies comparing MPFLR techniques. The authors adhered to the PRISMA and R-AMSTAR guidelines as well as the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Data on patient-reported outcome measures were recorded. Quality assessment was carried out using the MINORS and Cochrane Risk of Bias assessment tools. Certainty of evidence was carried out with the GRADE assessment tool. Results Ten studies comprising 723 patients (723 knees) were included in this review. The weighted mean diference in Kujala, Lysholm, and IKDC scores comparing single-and double-tunnel patellar drilling techniques was 2.66 (95% CI −1.05-6.37, p = 0.16, I 2 = 0%) with moderate certainty, 0.78 (95% CI −9.02-10.58, p = 0.88, I 2 = 87%) with low certainty, and 1.71 (95% CI −2.43-5.86, p = 0.42, I 2 = 0%) with low certainty, respectively. Double-suture anchor patellar ixation demonstrated greater Kujala scores than transpatellar ixation (87.1 ± 2.8 vs 84.0 ± 3.8, p < 0.001) with moderate certainty. Y-shaped graft patellar ixation demonstrated superior Kujala scores to C-shaped graft patellar ixation (95.9 ± 4.7 vs 91.3 ± 9.7, p = 0.001) with moderate certainty. Augmentation of femoral ixation with polyester sutures demonstrated superior Kujala scores (97.8 ± 6.4. vs 88.0 ± 6.3, p < 0.005) with low certainty. Four-stranded grafts demonstrated greater Kujala scores than two-stranded grafts (93.5 ± 2.6 vs 91.6 ± 3.5, p = 0.01) with low certainty.
ConclusionThe optimal MPFLR surgical technique is likely to utilize a four-stranded graft using either endobutton, doublesuture anchor, or transosseous suture patellar ixation with polyester suture augmented interference screw femoral ixation. Orthopedic surgeons can consider employing such a technique to improve patient outcomes by conferring greater graft stability, strength, and function. Level of evidence Level II.