Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 5 of 5
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 10 | Pages 842 - 849
13 Oct 2021
van den Boom NAC Stollenwerck GANL Lodewijks L Bransen J Evers SMAA Poeze M

Aims. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to compare open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with primary arthrodesis (PA) in the treatment of Lisfranc injuries, regarding patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and risk of secondary surgery. The aim was to conclusively determine the best available treatment based on the most complete and recent evidence available. Methods. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, and SPORTDiscus. Additionally, ongoing trial registers and reference lists of included articles were screened. Risk of bias (RoB) and level of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tools and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. The random and fixed-effect models were used for the statistical analysis. Results. A total of 20 studies were selected for this review, of which 12 were comparative studies fit for meta-analysis, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This resulted in a total analyzed population of 392 patients treated with ORIF and 249 patients treated with PA. The mean differences between the two groups in American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS), VAS, and SF-36 scores were -7.41 (95% confidence interval (CI) -13.31 to -1.51), 0.77 (95% CI -0.85 to 2.39), and -1.20 (95% CI -3.86 to 1.46), respectively. Conclusion. This is the first study to find a statistically significant difference in PROMs, as measured by the AOFAS score, in favour of PA for the treatment of Lisfranc injuries. However, this difference may not be clinically relevant, and therefore drawing a definitive conclusion requires confirmation by a large prospective high-quality RCT. Such a study should also assess cost-effectiveness, as cost considerations might be decisive in decision-making. Level of Evidence: I. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(10):842–849


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 3 | Pages 174 - 180
17 Mar 2021
Wu DY Lam EKF

Aims. The purpose of this study is to examine the adductus impact on the second metatarsal by the nonosteotomy nonarthrodesis syndesmosis procedure for the hallux valgus deformity correction, and how it would affect the mechanical function of the forefoot in walking. For correcting the metatarsus primus varus deformity of hallux valgus feet, the syndesmosis procedure binds first metatarsal to the second metatarsal with intermetatarsal cerclage sutures. Methods. We reviewed clinical records of a single surgical practice from its entire 2014 calendar year. In total, 71 patients (121 surgical feet) qualified for the study with a mean follow-up of 20.3 months (SD 6.2). We measured their metatarsus adductus angle with the Sgarlato’s method (SMAA), and the intermetatarsal angle (IMA) and metatarsophalangeal angle (MPA) with Hardy’s mid axial method. We also assessed their American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) clinical scale score, and photographic and pedobarographic images for clinical function results. Results. SMAA increased from preoperative 15.9° (SD 4.9°) to 17.2° (5.0°) (p < 0.001). IMA and MPA corrected from 14.6° (SD 3.3°) and 31.9° (SD 8.0°) to 7.2° (SD 2.2°) and 18.8° (SD 6.4°) (p < 0.001), respectively. AOFAS score improved from 66.8 (SD 12.0) to 96.1 (SD 8.0) points (p < 0.001). Overall, 98% (119/121) of feet with preoperative plantar calluses had them disappeared or noticeably subsided, and 93% (113/121) of feet demonstrated pedobarographic medialization of forefoot force in walking. We reported all complications. Conclusion. This study, for the first time, reported the previously unknown metatarsus adductus side-effect of the syndesmosis procedure. However, it did not compromise function restoration of the forefoot by evidence of our patients' plantar callus and pedobarographic findings. Level of Clinical Evidence: III. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(3):174–180


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 4, Issue 12 | Pages 957 - 963
18 Dec 2023
van den Heuvel S Penning D Sanders F van Veen R Sosef N van Dijkman B Schepers T

Aims

The primary aim of this study was to present the mid-term follow-up of a multicentre randomized controlled trial (RCT) which compared the functional outcome following routine removal (RR) to the outcome following on-demand removal (ODR) of the syndesmotic screw (SS).

Methods

All patients included in the ‘ROutine vs on DEmand removal Of the syndesmotic screw’ (RODEO) trial received the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS), American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Hindfoot Score (AOFAS), Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS), and EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D). Out of the 152 patients, 109 (71.7%) completed the mid-term follow-up questionnaire and were included in this study (53 treated with RR and 56 with ODR). Median follow-up was 50 months (interquartile range 43.0 to 56.0) since the initial surgical treatment of the acute syndesmotic injury. The primary outcome of this study consisted of the OMAS scores of the two groups.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 3, Issue 7 | Pages 596 - 606
28 Jul 2022
Jennison T Spolton-Dean C Rottenburg H Ukoumunne O Sharpe I Goldberg A

Aims

Revision rates for ankle arthroplasties are higher than hip or knee arthroplasties. When a total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) fails, it can either undergo revision to another ankle replacement, revision of the TAA to ankle arthrodesis (fusion), or amputation. Currently there is a paucity of literature on the outcomes of these revisions. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the outcomes of revision TAA with respect to surgery type, functional outcomes, and reoperations.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Medline, Embase, Cinahl, and Cochrane reviews were searched for relevant papers. Papers analyzing surgical treatment for failed ankle arthroplasties were included. All papers were reviewed by two authors. Overall, 34 papers met the inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 5, Issue 3 | Pages 227 - 235
18 Mar 2024
Su Y Wang Y Fang C Tu Y Chang C Kuan F Hsu K Shih C

Aims

The optimal management of posterior malleolar ankle fractures, a prevalent type of ankle trauma, is essential for improved prognosis. However, there remains a debate over the most effective surgical approach, particularly between screw and plate fixation methods. This study aims to investigate the differences in outcomes associated with these fixation techniques.

Methods

We conducted a comprehensive review of clinical trials comparing anteroposterior (A-P) screws, posteroanterior (P-A) screws, and plate fixation. Two investigators validated the data sourced from multiple databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science). Following PRISMA guidelines, we carried out a network meta-analysis (NMA) using visual analogue scale and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Score (AOFAS) as primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes included range of motion limitations, radiological outcomes, and complication rates.