Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

Foot & Ankle

THE FINANCIAL IMPACT OF DIASTASIS SCREW VERSUS TIGHTROPE FIXATION OF UNSTABLE SYNDESMOSIS INJURIES OF THE ANKLE

British Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (BOFAS)



Abstract

Introduction

Syndesmosis injuries are significant injuries and require anatomical reduction. However, stabilisation of these injuries with syndesmosis screws carries specific complications and many surgeons advocate a second operation to remove the screw. Primary Tightrope suture fixation has been shown to be an effective treatment for syndesmotic injuries and avoids the need for a second operation.

Materials and Methods

A retrospective audit identified patients who were treated for syndesmosis injuries over a two year period. Theatre and clinic costs were obtained to compare the cost of syndesmosis fixation using diastasis screws with the estimated cost of primary syndesmosis fixation using a Tightrope suture.

Results

79 patients received diastasis screw fixation of syndesmosis injuries between January 2007 and January 2009. The mean number of follow up clinic appointments was 3.7 following initial surgery, and 2.2 following diastasis screw removal. Allowing for device, theatre time and clinic appointment costs, and an estimated average of 4 follow up appointments following Tightrope syndesmosis fixation, primary fixation with this device could a saving of 34 theatre slots, 68 outpatient clinic appointments, and £12,138 per year at our hospital.

Discussion

Biomechanical studies have demonstrated a reduction in normal tibiotalar external rotation with the presence of a diastasis screw, and there are several published reports of complications when these screws are retained. The Tightrope suture provides reduction of the syndesmosis whilst allowing normal physiological movement at the distal tibiofibular joint and negates the need for a second operation to remove the implant. In addition there may be improvements in foot and ankle scores and a faster return to work when these devices are used compared with traditional screw fixation.

Conclusion

In addition to the patient benefits, our audit suggests that there may be significant financial benefits associated with primary syndesmosis fixation with Tightrope sutures.