Background. Anatomical reduction and stable internal fixation has been recommended as the standard treatment for fracture dislocations of the tarsometatarsal (Lisfranc) joint. Many methods of fixation have been utilised including K-wires and screw fixation, the latter being the preferred method as it provides a stronger more stable construct. However, the screws require removal after the injury has healed. We present a different method and technique of stabilisation utilising memory staples. The technique is extra-articular and avoids breaching the TMTJ joint surface, is simple and avoids the necessity of removal of hardware. Methods. 11 patients with isolated ligamentous Lisfranc injuries were treated with memory staple fixation over the past 4 years at our centre. Patients' outcome was assessed with use of the Foot & Ankle Disability Index (FADI) Score, the American Foot & Ankle Score, radiographic and clinical follow-up at an average time of 2 years post surgery. Results. The average FADI score was 86.4 (on a scale of 100 points, with 100 points indicating an excellent outcome). The average American Foot & Ankle score was 90 out of a 100. All patients demonstrated stable long term reduction of the TMT joints and none have required subsequent fusion. In all but 1 patient, there had been fatigue failure of the memory staples making hardware removal unnecessary. Conclusion. Internal fixation of Lisfranc joint fracture-dislocation with memory staples is an effective fixation method with results comparable to conventional screw fixation with the added benefit of alleviating the need for further surgery to remove the metal work

Introduction. Lisfranc joint injuries account for only 0.2% of all fractures but early diagnosis improves the chances of a better outcom]. Radiographic signs, such as diastasis (>2mm) of the 1–2 interspace, are subtle and. often missed, leading to a poorer outcome. We present a new radiographic sign, less likely to result in missed diagnoses. Null nypothesis: The intermetarsal angle remains unchanged in Lisfranc injuries. Method. A series of radiographs demonstrating Lisfranc injury were interspersed with normal and postoperative cases. Evidence of fixation was obscured. A selection of Foundation and Core Trainee medical staff measured the intermetatarsal angle (IMA) on two separate occasions. The measuring technique was demonstrated with no explanation for the reason behind the measurement. Results. The intra-class correlation (ICC) between observers was 0.96 and a mean 0.86 (range 0.69–0.96) for individual observers. IMA on comparative weight bearing AP views of injured and normal side, using Wilcoxon-signed rank test demonstrated a P< 0.0001 with mean values of 6.6 degrees (normal) versus 4.85 degrees (injured) and standard deviation of 1.97 & 1.91 degrees respectively. Conclusion. The high ICC value suggests that this radiographic sign is easily taught, reliable and reproducible. Analysis of individual angles suggests that there is a significant difference between the normal and pathological IMA. We therefore reject our null hypothesis. The data supports our proposition that that the IMA becomes more parallel in Lisfranc injuries and that this is an easily recognised sign, which could help reduce the incidence of missed injuries. Elucidation of the exact anatomical pathology responsible is the basis for further, anatomical, studies

Lisfranc injuries account for 0.2% of all fractures and have been linked to poorer functional outcomes, in particular resulting in post-traumatic arthritis, midfoot collapse and chronic pain. This study assesses the longitudinal functional outcomes in patients with low and high energy Lisfranc injuries treated both operatively and non-operatively. Patients above 16 years with Lisfranc injuries from January 2008 and December 2017 were identified through the Victorian Orthopaedic Trauma Outcomes (VOTOR) registry. Follow-up performed at 6, 12 and 24 months through telephone interviews with response rate of 86.1%, 84.2% and 76.2% respectively. Longitudinal functional outcome data using Global Outcome Assessment, EQ-5D-5L, numerical pain scale, Short-Form 12, the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule and return to work status were collected. Univariate analysis was performed and variables showing a significant difference between groups (p < 0.25) were analysed with multivariable mixed effects regression model. 745 patients included in this retrospective cohort study. At 24 months, both the operative and non-operative groups demonstrated similar functional outcomes trending towards an improvement. Mixed effect regression models for the EQ items for mobility (OR 1.80, CI 0.91 – 3.57), self-care (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.09-3.49), usual activities (OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.99-1.03), pain (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.61-1.89), anxiety (OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.72-2.34) and pain scale (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.51 – 2.22) and return to work (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.56-2.91) between groups were very similar and not statistically significantly different. We concluded that there was no statistically significant difference between operative and non-operative patients with low and high energy Lisfranc injuries. Current clinical practices in Lisfranc injury management are appropriate and not inadvertently causing any further harm to patients. Future research comparing fracture patterns, fixation types and corresponding functional outcomes can help determine gold standard Lisfranc injury management

Purpose. Operative treatment of Lisfranc joint injuries typically includes reduction and stabilization of the medial and middle columns of the midfoot. Mobility of the lateral column is preserved where possible, such that indications for lateral column stabilization rely upon the surgeons assessment of instability. In this case series, the indication for lateral column stabilization was defined by the results of an intra-operative stress test. The purpose of this study was to determine whether an intra-operative fluoroscopic stress test of the lateral column was sufficient to determine the need for internal fixation of the lateral column in Lisfranc joint injuries. Method. 35 adult patients with Lisfranc injuries operated in our centre by a single surgeon from 2005–2009 were reviewed. All patients had unstable midfoot fracture dislocations, treated by reduction and internal fixation including an intra-operative stress examination to determine the need for lateral column fixation. Patients were contacted for clinical and radiographic review at a mean of 31 months post injury. Functional outcome was assessed using general and joint-specific outcome tools (AOFAS midfoot score and LEM). Radiographic review included analysis of joint displacement and arthritic changes in preoperative, postoperative, and most recent radiographs. Results. Pre-operative imaging demonstrated displacement of the lateral column in 25 / 35 patients. Nineteen of these 25 had a stable reduction of the lateral column following medial and middle column fixation, based upon an intra-operative stress examination. Only 6 patients had persistent instability; these were treated with lateral column stabilization. Reduction of the lateral column was maintained at final follow up in 100 percent of 35 patients. Lateral midfoot pain was present in 5/6 patients requiring lateral fixation, compared to 1/(19) patient who did not require lateral fixation. AOFAS midfoot scores (mean) were 80 15. in patients with no evidence of lateral column instability, 79 15. in patients with preoperative displacement but a negative stress examination, and 77 18 in patients requiring lateral fixation (p>0.05). Post-traumatic arthrosis was present in 3/10 patients with no evidence of lateral column instability, 4/19 patients with preoperative displacement but a negative stress examination, and 4/6 in patients requiring lateral fixation (p>0.05). Conclusion. The decision to stabilize the lateral column during surgery on Lisfranc injuries was aided by an intra-operative fluoroscopic stress examination. Based upon the stress examination, 19 / 25 patients who had a displaced lateral column at the time of presentation avoided lateral fixation. None of these 19 patients treated without lateral fixation lost reduction in the follow up period. A fluoroscopic intra operative stress test safely reduced the need for lateral column fixation in displaced Lisfranc joint injuries

Tarsometatarsal arthritis must be evaluated in conjunction with naviculocuneiform joint arthritis, as the two generally coexist. Primary osteoarthritis or systemic arthritis generally leads to uncomplicated non-deformity correction through arthrodesis. Challenges in correction become more pronounced following Lisfranc injury, where deformity and ligament instability introduce malalignment that mandates osteotomies to correct deformity. Diagnosis hinges on both CT scan data and selective diagnostic injections under fluoroscopy. The surgeon must simultaneously consider minimising bone resection to lessen the impact of metatarsal shortening. In addition, the three columns of the foot must be respected with reference to midfoot arthrodesis rules, introducing challenges in operative reconstruction as the lateral column mandates preserved flexibility. In addition, collapse at the midfoot often leads to a rigid pes planovalgus deformity, and the surgeon must consider when it is appropriate to add a medial slide calcaneal osteotomy and gastrocnemius recession. Finally, naviculocuneiform joint arthrodesis, if required, introduces significant technical challenges in both alignment and fixation that will be addressed