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. Results. A total of 329 studies were identified, of which nine were of interest, and another two articles were added after screening the references. In all, two randomised controlled trials (RCT) and nine case-control series were found. The two RCTs found no difference in functional outcome between routine removal and retaining the syndesmotic screw. All but one of the case-control series found equal or better outcomes when the syndesmotic screw was retained. However, all included studies had substantial methodological flaws. Conclusions. The currently available literature does not support routine elective removal of syndesmotic screws. However, the literature is of insufficient quality to be able to draw definitive conclusions. Secondary procedures incur a provider and institutional cost and expose the patient to the risk of complications. Therefore, in the absence of high quality evidence there appears to be little justification for routine removal of syndesmotic screws. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1497–1504

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.

The incidence of acute and chronic conditions of the tendo Achillis appear to be increasing. Causation is multifactorial but the role of inherited genetic elements and the influence of environmental factors altering gene expression are increasingly being recognised. Certain individuals’ tendons carry specific variations of genetic sequence that may make them more susceptible to injury. Alterations in the structure or relative amounts of the components of tendon and fine control of activity within the extracellular matrix affect the response of the tendon to loading with failure in certain cases.

This review summarises present knowledge of the influence of genetic patterns on the pathology of the tendo Achillis, with a focus on the possible biological mechanisms by which genetic factors are involved in the aetiology of tendon pathology. Finally, we assess potential future developments with both the opportunities and risks that they may carry.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:305–13.