Anatomical reduction of unstable Lisfranc injuries is crucial. Evidence as to the best methods of surgical stabilization remains sparse, with small patient numbers a particular issue. Dorsal bridge plating offers rigid stability and joint preservation. The primary aim of this study was to assess the medium-term functional outcomes for patients treated with this technique at our centre. Additionally, we review for risk factors that influence outcomes. 85 patients who underwent open reduction and dorsal bridge plate fixation of unstable Lisfranc injuries between January 2014 and January 2019 were identified. Metalwork was not routinely removed. A retrospective review of case notes was conducted. The Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire summary index (MOXFQ-Index) was the primary outcome measure, collected at final follow-up, with a minimum follow-up of 24 months. The American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot scale, complications, and all-cause re-operation rates were secondary outcome measures. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify risk factors associated with poorer outcomes.Background
Methods
Peri-prosthetic infection is amongst the most
common causes of failure following total knee replacement (TKR).
In the presence of established infection, thorough joint debridement
and removal of all components is necessary following which new components
may be implanted. This can be performed in one or two stages; two-stage revision
with placement of an interim antibiotic-loaded spacer is regarded
by many to be the standard procedure for eradication of peri-prosthetic
joint infection. We present our experience of a consecutive series of 50 single-stage
revision TKRs for established deep infection performed between 1979
and 2010. There were 33 women and 17 men with a mean age at revision
of 66.8 years (42 to 84) and a mean follow-up of 10.5 years (2 to
24). The mean time between the primary TKR and the revision procedure
was 2.05 years (1 to 8). Only one patient required a further revision for recurrent infection,
representing a success rate of 98%. Nine patients required further
revision for aseptic loosening, according to microbiological testing
of biopsies taken at the subsequent surgery. Three other patients
developed a further septic episode but none required another revision. These results suggest that a single-stage revision can produce
comparable results to a two-stage revision. Single-stage revision
offers a reduction in costs as well as less morbidity and inconvenience
for patients. Cite this article:
