Introduction. Orthopaedic and trauma surgeons not infrequently encounter the hallucal interphalangeal joint sesamoid (HIPJS) in irreducible traumatic dislocations. However, patients with the classic triad of plantar keratoma beneath a hyperextended interphalangeal (IP) joint associated with stiffness of the first metatarsophalangeal joint tend to present to podiatrists rather than orthopaedic surgeons. Methods. We present our experience with the HIPJS following first metatarsophalangeal joint (MTP1) arthrodesis in 18 feet of 16 women, aged 42 to 70 years old. Where CT scan was available, volume of the HIPJS was determined using Vitrea Software. Results. Two groups of patients were identified. Group 1 consisted of 12 feet in 11 women, who developed a painful keratoma beneath a gradually hyperextending IP joint of the great toe, at varying intervals (range 6 to 75 months) following MTP1 arthrodesis. Group 2 comprised 6 feet in 5 women who had undergone MTP1 arthrodesis but reported no symptoms in relation to an undetected and/or recognized, but unexcised HIPJS (range 15 to 97 months). We found no difference in average size of the HIPJS between Groups 1 and 2 (190.42 mm. 3. and 196.47 mm. 3. , respectively). Clinically, all toes had been fused in good position and no difference existed in the post-operative angle subtended by the proximal phalanx of the arthrodesed big toe with the first metatarsal between the 2 groups. A good outcome followed removal of metalwork and excision of the HIPJS in the symptomatic patients. Conclusion. Think of a HIPJS in the patient who presents with a painful plantar keratoma beneath a hyperextended interphalangeal joint following MTP1 arthrodesis. Do not rush into a Moberg osteotomy as this will only push the big toe higher against the toe-box. Consider prophylactic excision of a HIPJS prior to MTP1 arthrodesis

Ankle fractures are one of the most common bony injuries presenting to the trauma surgeon. The more severe ones result in disruption of the tibiofibular syndesmosis and hence worse outcome. The outcome depends on accurate reduction of syndesmosis. The two main options in managing these injuries are syndesmotic screws or tightrope. The aim of this study is to compare the rate of complications between these two techniques and their radiographic results. Retrospective data from 62 patients between September 2009 and March 2011 who had fixation of syndesmosis was obtained from theatre logbooks. 46 patients had syndesmotic screws inserted while 16 had tightrope. The average age was comparable in both groups (51 years v/s 41). 25 of the 46 syndesmotic screws inserted were removed. No tightropes had to be removed for any reason. 2 patients with syndesmotic screws had wound complications while 1 patient which tightrope insertion had a persistent diastasis. There were no differences in radiological outcome between the two groups with regards to reduction of syndesmosis (measured by talofibular clear space minus medial clear space) (p-value 0.283). The difference between the talocrural angles was also of no significance (p-value 0.344). Our results indicate that tightropes achieve radiologically similar reduction of syndesmosis as screws without any significant difference in complications. The need for a second operation is significantly lower with tightrope fixation

Aims

Fractures of the navicular can occur in isolation but, owing to the intimate anatomical and biomechanical relationships, are often associated with other injuries to the neighbouring bones and joints in the foot. As a result, they can lead to long-term morbidity and poor function. Our aim in this study was to identify patterns of injury in a new classification system of traumatic fractures of the navicular, with consideration being given to the commonly associated injuries to the midfoot.

Aims

Patients with diabetes are at increased risk of wound complications after open reduction and internal fixation of unstable ankle fractures. A fibular nail avoids large surgical incisions and allows anatomical reduction of the mortise.

In this retrospective cohort study, we analysed the incidence and functional outcome of a distal tibiofibular synostosis. Patients with an isolated AO type 44-B or C fracture of the ankle who underwent surgical treatment between 1995 and 2007 were invited for clinical and radiological review. The American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society score, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons score and a visual analogue score for pain were used to assess outcome.

A total of 274 patients were available; the mean follow-up was 9.7 years (8 to 18). The extent of any calcification or synostosis at the level of the distal interosseous membrane or syndesmosis on the contemporary radiographs was defined as: no or minor calcifications (group 1), severe calcification (group 2), or complete synostosis (group 3).

A total of 222 (81%) patients were in group 1, 37 (14%) in group 2 and 15 (5%) in group 3. There was no significant difference in incidence between AO type 44-B and type 44-C fractures (p = 0.89). Severe calcification or synostosis occurred in 21 patients (19%) in whom a syndesmotic screw was used and in 31 (19%) in whom a syndesmotic screw was not used.(p = 0.70). No significant differences were found between the groups except for a greater reduction in mean dorsiflexion in group 2 (p = 0.004).

This is the largest study on distal tibiofibular synostosis, and we found that a synostosis is a frequent complication of surgery for a fracture of the ankle. Although it theoretically impairs the range of movement of the ankle, it did not affect the outcome.

Our findings suggest that synostosis of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis in general does not warrant treatment.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:945–9.

Clinicians are often asked by patients, “When can I drive again?” after lower limb injury or surgery. This question is difficult to answer in the absence of any guidelines. This review aims to collate the currently available evidence and discuss the factors that influence the decision to allow a patient to return to driving. Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and EMBASE were searched using the following terms: ‘brake reaction time’, ‘brake response time’, ‘braking force’, ‘brake pedal force’, ‘resume driving’, ‘rate of application of force’, ‘driving after injury’, ‘joint replacement and driving’, and ‘fracture and driving’. Of the relevant literature identified, most studies used the brake reaction time and total brake time as the outcome measures. Varying recovery periods were proposed based on the type and severity of injury or surgery. Surveys of the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, the Police, insurance companies in the United Kingdom and Orthopaedic Surgeons offered a variety of opinions.

There is currently insufficient evidence for any authoritative body to determine fitness to drive. The lack of guidance could result in patients being withheld from driving for longer than is necessary, or returning to driving while still unsafe.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:290–4.