Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 20 of 22
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 10 | Pages 842 - 849
13 Oct 2021
van den Boom NAC Stollenwerck GANL Lodewijks L Bransen J Evers SMAA Poeze M

Aims. This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to compare open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with primary arthrodesis (PA) in the treatment of Lisfranc injuries, regarding patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and risk of secondary surgery. The aim was to conclusively determine the best available treatment based on the most complete and recent evidence available. Methods. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials (CENTRAL), EMBASE, CINAHL, PEDro, and SPORTDiscus. Additionally, ongoing trial registers and reference lists of included articles were screened. Risk of bias (RoB) and level of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tools and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) tool. The random and fixed-effect models were used for the statistical analysis. Results. A total of 20 studies were selected for this review, of which 12 were comparative studies fit for meta-analysis, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs). This resulted in a total analyzed population of 392 patients treated with ORIF and 249 patients treated with PA. The mean differences between the two groups in American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS), VAS, and SF-36 scores were -7.41 (95% confidence interval (CI) -13.31 to -1.51), 0.77 (95% CI -0.85 to 2.39), and -1.20 (95% CI -3.86 to 1.46), respectively. Conclusion. This is the first study to find a statistically significant difference in PROMs, as measured by the AOFAS score, in favour of PA for the treatment of Lisfranc injuries. However, this difference may not be clinically relevant, and therefore drawing a definitive conclusion requires confirmation by a large prospective high-quality RCT. Such a study should also assess cost-effectiveness, as cost considerations might be decisive in decision-making. Level of Evidence: I. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(10):842–849


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 86-B, Issue 4 | Pages 527 - 530
1 May 2004
Calder JDF Whitehouse SL Saxby TS

The results of treatment of Lisfranc injuries are often unsatisfactory. This retrospective study investigated 46 patients with isolated Lisfranc injuries at a minimum of two years after surgery. Thirteen patients had a poor outcome and had to change employment, or were unable to find work as a result of this injury. The presence of a compensation claim (p = 0.02) and a delay in diagnosis of more than six months were associated with a poor outcome (p = 0.01). There was no association between poor functional outcome and age, gender, mechanism of injury or previous occupation. This study may have medico-legal implications on reporting the prognosis for such injuries, and highlights the importance of prompt diagnosis and treatment


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 12, Issue 2 | Pages 19 - 24
1 Apr 2023

The April 2023 Foot & Ankle Roundup. 360. looks at: Outcomes following a two-stage revision total ankle arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection; Temporary bridge plate fixation and joint motion after an unstable Lisfranc injury; Outcomes of fusion in type II os naviculare; Total ankle arthroplasty versus arthrodesis for end-stage ankle osteoarthritis; Normal saline for plantar fasciitis: placebo or therapeutic?; Distraction arthroplasty for ankle osteoarthritis: does it work?; Let there be movement: ankle arthroplasty after previous fusion; Morbidity and mortality after diabetic Charcot foot arthropathy


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 4, Issue 6 | Pages 13 - 14
1 Dec 2015

The December 2015 Foot & Ankle Roundup. 360 . looks at: The midfoot fusion bolt: has it had its day?; Ankle arthroplasty: only for the old?; A return to the Keller’s osteotomy for diabetic feet?; Joint sparing surgery for ankle arthritis in the context of deformity?; Beware the subtalar fusion in the ankle arthrodesis patient?; Nonunion in the foot and ankle a predictive score; Cast versus early weight bearing following Achilles tendon repair; Should we plate Lisfranc injuries?


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 4, Issue 4 | Pages 18 - 20
1 Aug 2015

The August 2015 Foot & Ankle Roundup. 360 . looks at: Is orthosis more important than physio in tibialis posterior deficiency?; Radiographic evaluation of ankle injury; Sciatic catheter quite enough!; A fresh look at avascular necrosis of the talus; Total ankle and VTE; Outcomes of posterior malleolar fracture; Absorbable sutures in the Achilles tendon; Lisfranc injuries under the spotlight


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 84-B, Issue 7 | Pages 981 - 985
1 Sep 2002
Peicha G Labovitz J Seibert FJ Grechenig W Weiglein A Preidler KW Quehenberger F

The anatomy of the mortise of the Lisfranc joint between the medial and lateral cuneiforms was studied in detail, with particular reference to features which may predispose to injury. In 33 consecutive patients with Lisfranc injuries we measured, from conventional radiographs, the medial depth of the mortise (A), the lateral depth (B) and the length of the second metatarsal (C). MRI was used to confirm the diagnosis. We calculated the mean depth of the mortise (A+B)/2, and the variables of the lever arm as follows: C/A, C/B and C/mean depth. The data were compared with those obtained in 84 cadaver feet with no previous injury of the Lisfranc joint complex. Statistical analysis used Student’s two-sample t-test at the 5% error level and forward stepwise logistic regression. The mean medial depth of the mortise was found to be significantly less in patients with Lisfranc injuries than in the control group. Stepwise logistic regression identified only this depth as a significant risk factor for Lisfranc injuries. The odds of being in the injury group is 0.52 (approximately half) that of being a control if the medial depth of the mortise is increased by 1 mm, after adjusting for the other variables in the model. Our findings show that the mortise in patients with injuries to the Lisfranc joint is shallower than in the control group and the shallower it is the greater is the risk of injury


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 12, Issue 2 | Pages 34 - 36
1 Apr 2023

The April 2023 Trauma Roundup360 looks at: Displaced femoral neck fractures in patients aged 55 to 70 years: internal fixation or total hip arthroplasty?; Tibial plateau fractures: continuous passive motion approves range of motion; Lisfranc fractures: to fuse or not to fuse, that is the question; Is hardware removal after clavicle fracture plate fixation beneficial?; Fixation to coverage in Grade IIIB open fractures – what’s the time window?; Nonoperative versus locking plate fixation in the proximal humerus; Retrograde knee nailing or lateral plate for distal femur fractures?


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 11, Issue 11 | Pages 814 - 825
14 Nov 2022
Ponkilainen V Kuitunen I Liukkonen R Vaajala M Reito A Uimonen M

Aims

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to gather epidemiological information on selected musculoskeletal injuries and to provide pooled injury-specific incidence rates.

Methods

PubMed (National Library of Medicine) and Scopus (Elsevier) databases were searched. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they reported incidence rate (or count with population at risk), contained data on adult population, and were written in English language. The number of cases and population at risk were collected, and the pooled incidence rates (per 100,000 person-years) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by using either a fixed or random effects model.


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 11, Issue 2 | Pages 37 - 41
1 Apr 2022


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 11, Issue 2 | Pages 22 - 26
1 Apr 2022


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 100-B, Issue 4 | Pages 468 - 474
1 Apr 2018
Kirzner N Zotov P Goldbloom D Curry H Bedi H

Aims

The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the functional and radiological outcomes of bridge plating, screw fixation, and a combination of both methods for the treatment of Lisfranc fracture dislocations.

Patients and Methods

A total of 108 patients were treated for a Lisfranc fracture dislocation over a period of nine years. Of these, 38 underwent transarticular screw fixation, 45 dorsal bridge plating, and 25 a combination technique. Injuries were assessed preoperatively according to the Myerson classification system. The outcome measures included the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, the validated Manchester Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) functional tool, and the radiological Wilppula classification of anatomical reduction.


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 6, Issue 1 | Pages 16 - 19
1 Feb 2017


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 10 | Pages 1299 - 1311
1 Oct 2016
Hong CC Pearce CJ Ballal MS Calder JDF

Injuries to the foot in athletes are often subtle and can lead to a substantial loss of function if not diagnosed and treated appropriately. For these injuries in general, even after a diagnosis is made, treatment options are controversial and become even more so in high level athletes where limiting the time away from training and competition is a significant consideration.

In this review, we cover some of the common and important sporting injuries affecting the foot including updates on their management and outcomes.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1299–1311.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 101-B, Issue 4 | Pages 447 - 453
1 Apr 2019
Sanders FRK Backes M Dingemans SA Hoogendoorn JM Schep NWL Vermeulen J Goslings JC Schepers T

Aims

The aim of this study was to evaluate the functional outcome in patients undergoing implant removal (IR) after fracture fixation below the level of the knee.

Patients and Methods

All adult patients (18 to 75 years) undergoing IR after fracture fixation below the level of the knee between November 2014 and September 2016 were included as part of the WIFI (Wound Infections Following Implant Removal Below the Knee) trial, performed in 17 teaching hospitals and two university hospitals in The Netherlands. In this multicentre prospective cohort, the primary outcome was the difference in functional status before and after IR, measured by the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS), with a minimal clinically important difference of nine points.


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 7, Issue 5 | Pages 16 - 18
1 Oct 2018


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 99-B, Issue 4 | Pages 503 - 507
1 Apr 2017
White TO Mackenzie SP Carter TH Jefferies JG Prescott OR Duckworth AD Keating JF

Aims

Fracture clinics are often characterised by the referral of large numbers of unselected patients with minor injuries not requiring investigation or intervention, long waiting times and recurrent unnecessary reviews. Our experience had been of an unsustainable system and we implemented a ‘Trauma Triage Clinic’ (TTC) in order to rationalise and regulate access to our fracture service. The British Orthopaedic Association’s guidelines have required a prospective evaluation of this change of practice, and we report our experience and results.

Patients and Methods

We review the management of all 12 069 patients referred to our service in the calendar year 2014, with a minimum of one year follow-up during the calendar year 2015.


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 5, Issue 4 | Pages 25 - 27
1 Aug 2016


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 100-B, Issue 2 | Pages 176 - 182
1 Feb 2018
Petrie MJ Blakey CM Chadwick C Davies HG Blundell CM Davies MB

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.

Patients and Methods

We undertook a retrospective review of 285 consecutive patients presenting over an eight- year period with a fracture of the navicular. Five common patterns of injury were identified and classified according to the radiological features. Type 1 fractures are dorsal avulsion injuries related to the capsule of the talonavicular joint. Type 2 fractures are isolated avulsion injuries to the tuberosity of the navicular. Type 3 fractures are a variant of tarsometatarsal fracture/dislocations creating instability of the medial ray. Type 4 fractures involve the body of the navicular with no associated injury to the lateral column and type 5 fractures occur in conjunction with disruption of the midtarsal joint with crushing of the medial or lateral, or both, columns of the foot.


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 6, Issue 5 | Pages 27 - 30
1 Oct 2017


Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 5, Issue 1 | Pages 37 - 40
1 Feb 2016
Ribbans W