Lisfranc injuries are uncommon and can be challenging to manage. There is considerable variation in opinion regarding the mode of operative treatment of these injuries, with some studies preferring primary arthrodesis over traditional open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). We aim to assess the clinical and radiological outcomes of the patients treated with ORIF in our unit.

This is a retrospective study, in which all 27 consecutive patients treated with ORIF between June 2013 and October 2018 by one surgeon were included with an average follow-up of 2.4 years. All patients underwent ORIF with joint-sparing surgery by a dorsal bridging plate (DBP) for the second and third tarsometatarsal (TMT) joint, and the first TMT joint was fixed with trans-articular screws. Patients had clinical examination and radiological assessment, and completed American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot score and Foot Function Index (FFI) questionnaires.

Our early results of 22 patients (5 lost to follow-up) showed that 16 (72%) patients were pain free, walking normally without aids, and wearing normal shoes and 68% were able to run or play sports. The mean AOFAS midfoot score was 78.1 (63–100) and the average FFI was 19.5 (0.6–34). Radiological assessment confirmed that only three patients had progression to posttraumatic arthritis at the TMT joints though only one of these was clinically symptomatic.

Good clinical and radiological outcomes can be achieved by ORIF in Lisfranc injuries with joint-sparing surgery using DBP.

Introduction

Carpal tunnel syndrome is a common neuropathy of the median nerve. Occupation has been widely examined as a risk factor for the development of carpal tunnel syndrome. The aim of this study was to examine the validity of the United Kingdom (UK) NS-SEC (National Statistics Socioeconomic Classification) in the assessment of correlation between occupation and CTS.

Introduction

The association of occupation and carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is unclear. Population based studies have failed to prove causal relationships between certain types of work and the onset of CTS. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of CTS with the underlying regional occupational profile and assess differences in disease severity.

Introduction: Patient-reported outcome and satisfaction scores have become increasingly important in evaluating successful surgery. There is continued enthusiasm for metal-on-metal resurfacing of the hip, particularly as an alternative to total hip replacement (THR) in young, active patients with osteoarthritis. However, although mid-term survivorship data is promising, it remains unclear whether patient-reported outcomes following resurfacing match those following THR.

Patients and Methods: This case-matched control study compared patient-reported outcome and satisfaction data following hip resurfacing and total hip arthroplasty. Thirty-three consecutive patients selected for hip resurfacing were compared with 99 patients undergoing cemented total hip replacement (THR), matched for age, sex and pathology. Participants completed a Short-Form 12 Health Survey (SF-12) and Oxford Hip Score (OHS) questionnaire pre-operatively and 6 months post operatively, with an additional patient satisfaction questionnaire.

Results: There was no difference in length of hospital stay. Both groups reported improved outcome scores, with mean OHS improvements of 19.5 (95% CI: 17.0–22.1), and 20.6 (95% CI: 18.6–22.5) following resurfacing and THR respectively. There were similar improvements in SF-12 PCS of 14.2 (95% CI: 9.5 to 14.2) and 15.2 (95% CI: 13.2 to 18.2) for the resurfacing and THR groups respectively. The improvement in outcome scores did not differ between the two groups on multivariate regression analysis (P=0.509 for OHS, P=0.629 for SF-12 PCS). Both groups reported high levels of satisfaction, which tended to be better in patients undergoing hip resurfacing (97.0% vs 92.9%), with resurfacing patients reporting better pain relief (P=0.022) and better heavy lifting (P=0.038) at 6 months.

Discussion: This study shows that the short-term patient-centred outcome scores for hip resurfacing are at least as good as for conventional hip replacement, with slightly higher levels of satisfaction.