Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 5 of 5
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 102-B, Issue 2 | Pages 212 - 219
1 Feb 2020
Ræder BW Figved W Madsen JE Frihagen F Jacobsen SB Andersen MR

Aims. In a randomized controlled trial with two-year follow-up, patients treated with suture button (SB) for acute syndesmotic injury had better outcomes than patients treated with syndesmotic screw (SS). The aim of this study was to compare clinical and radiological outcomes for these treatment groups after five years. Methods. A total of 97 patients with acute syndesmotic injury were randomized to SS or SB. The five-year follow-up rate was 81 patients (84%). The primary outcome was the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle Hindfoot Scale. Secondary outcome measures included Olerud-Molander Ankle (OMA) score, visual analogue scale (VAS), EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), range of movement, complications, reoperations, and radiological results. CT scans of both ankles were obtained after surgery, and after one, two, and five years. Results. The SB group had higher median AOFAS score (100 (interquartile range (IQR) 92 to 100) vs 90 (IQR 85 to 100); p = 0.006) and higher median OMA score (100 (IQR 95 to 100) vs 95 (IQR 75 to 100); p = 0.006). The SS group had a higher incidence of ankle osteoarthritis (OA) (24 (65%) vs 14 (35%), odds ratio (OR) 3.4 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3 to 8.8); p = 0.009). On axial CT we measured a significantly smaller mean difference in the anterior tibiofibular distance between injured and non-injured ankles in the SB group (–0.1 mm vs 1.2 mm; p = 0.016). Conclusion. Five years after syndesmotic injury treated with either SB or SS, we found better AOFAS and OMA scores, and lower incidence of ankle OA, in the SB group. These long-term results favour the use of SB when treating an acute syndesmotic injury. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(2):212–219


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 12 | Pages 1431 - 1442
1 Dec 2024
Poutoglidou F van Groningen B McMenemy L Elliot R Marsland D

Lisfranc injuries were previously described as fracture-dislocations of the tarsometatarsal joints. With advancements in modern imaging, subtle Lisfranc injuries are now more frequently recognized, revealing that their true incidence is much higher than previously thought. Injury patterns can vary widely in severity and anatomy. Early diagnosis and treatment are essential to achieve good outcomes. The original classification systems were anatomy-based, and limited as tools for guiding treatment. The current review, using the best available evidence, instead introduces a stability-based classification system, with weightbearing radiographs and CT serving as key diagnostic tools. Stable injuries generally have good outcomes with nonoperative management, most reliably treated with immobilization and non-weightbearing for six weeks. Displaced or comminuted injuries require surgical intervention, with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) being the most common approach, with a consensus towards bridge plating. While ORIF generally achieves satisfactory results, its effectiveness can vary, particularly in high-energy injuries. Primary arthrodesis remains niche for the treatment of acute injuries, but may offer benefits such as lower rates of post-traumatic arthritis and hardware removal. Novel fixation techniques, including suture button fixation, aim to provide flexible stabilization, which theoretically could improve midfoot biomechanics and reduce complications. Early findings suggest promising functional outcomes, but further studies are required to validate this method compared with established techniques. Future research should focus on refining stability-based classification systems, validation of weightbearing CT, improving rehabilitation protocols, and optimizing surgical techniques for various injury patterns to ultimately enhance patient outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(12):1431–1442


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 104-B, Issue 1 | Pages 68 - 75
1 Jan 2022
Harris NJ Nicholson G Pountos I

Aims

The ideal management of acute syndesmotic injuries in elite athletes is controversial. Among several treatment methods used to stabilize the syndesmosis and facilitate healing of the ligaments, the use of suture tape (InternalBrace) has previously been described. The purpose of this study was to analyze the functional outcome, including American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) scores, knee-to-wall measurements, and the time to return to play in days, of unstable syndesmotic injuries treated with the use of the InternalBrace in elite athletes.

Methods

Data on a consecutive group of elite athletes who underwent isolated reconstruction of the anterior inferior tibiofibular ligament using the InternalBrace were collected prospectively. Our patient group consisted of 19 elite male athletes with a mean age of 24.5 years (17 to 52). Isolated injuries were seen in 12 patients while associated injuries were found in seven patients (fibular fracture, medial malleolus fracture, anterior talofibular ligament rupture, and posterior malleolus fracture). All patients had a minimum follow-up period of 17 months (mean 27 months (17 to 35)).


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 7 | Pages 874 - 883
1 Jul 2016
Ballal MS Pearce CJ Calder JDF

Sporting injuries around the ankle vary from simple sprains that will resolve spontaneously within a few days to severe injuries which may never fully recover and may threaten the career of a professional athlete. Some of these injuries can be easily overlooked altogether or misdiagnosed with potentially devastating effects on future performance. In this review article, we cover some of the common and important sporting injuries involving the ankle including updates on their management and outcomes.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:874–83.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1497 - 1504
1 Nov 2016
Dingemans SA Rammelt S White TO Goslings JC Schepers T

Aims

In approximately 20% of patients with ankle fractures, there is an concomitant injury to the syndesmosis which requires stabilisation, usually with one or more syndesmotic screws. The aim of this review is to evaluate whether removal of the syndesmotic screw is required in order for the patient to obtain optimal functional recovery.

Materials and Methods

A literature search was conducted in Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library for articles in which the syndesmotic screw was retained. Articles describing both removal and retaining of syndesmotic screws were included. Excluded were biomechanical studies, studies not providing patient related outcome measures, case reports, studies on skeletally immature patients and reviews. No restrictions regarding year of publication and language were applied.