Cadaveric analysis reveals consistent landmarks for harvesting rectus femoris tendon grafts in knee ligament reconstruction.
Purpose To perform a qualitative and quantitative cadaveric analysis of the rectus femoris (RF) tendon to determine its suitability as a standalone autograft for knee ligament reconstruction and to identify consistent anatomical landmarks for safe and reproducible harvest. Methods Ten fresh‐frozen cadaveric specimens (nine female, one male) without lower limb pathology were dissected to isolate the RF tendon. Distances from the patella to key anatomical fusions, tendon length, width and thickness were measured. A 1‐cm‐wide graft was harvested using a 7‐mm tendon harvester along an oblique path through two stab incisions, then folded into double‐, triple‐ and quadruple‐strand configurations. Diameters and usable lengths were recorded. All measurements were analysed descriptively. Results The RF tendon formed a reproducible superficial layer of the quadriceps tendon (QT) with two consistent fusion zones: a distal confluence at 22.4 ± 3.5 mm and a proximal confluence at 58.5 ± 13.2 mm above the patella, defining a 36.1 ± 13.0 mm segment free of deep attachments. Mean tendon length was 300.8 ± 29.6 mm. The tendon was widest proximally (47.0 ± 13.5 mm at 20 cm) and thickest distally (2.07 ± 0.6 mm at 5 cm). Graft diameters measured 8.75 ± 0.75 mm (double), 9.9 ± 1 mm (triple) and 11.4 ± 0.8 mm (quadruple), with corresponding lengths of 151.2 ± 16.3, 98.5 ± 13.3 and 74.0 ± 7.7 mm, respectively. Conclusions This cadaveric study mapped the RF tendon as the superficial layer of the QT and identified two consistent confluence zones that define a harvest corridor. Its dimensions support its use in both primary and revision procedures, including combined intra‐ and extra‐articular reconstructions. Level of Evidence Level V, basic science study.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marot et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: