Aims. The rationale for exacting restoration of skeletal anatomy after unstable ankle fracture is to improve outcomes by reducing complications from malunion; however, current definitions of malunion lack confirmatory clinical evidence. Methods. Radiological (absolute radiological measurements aided by computer software) and clinical (clinical interpretation of radiographs) definitions of malunion were compared within the Ankle Injury Management (AIM) trial cohort, including people aged ≥ 60 years with an unstable ankle fracture. Linear regressions were used to explore the relationship between radiological malunion (RM) at six months and changes in function at three years. Function was assessed with the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS), with a minimal clinically important difference set as six points, as per the AIM trial. Piecewise linear models were used to investigate new radiological thresholds which better explain symptom impact on ankle function. Results. Previously described measures of RM and surgeon opinion of clinically significant malunion (CSM) were shown to be related but with important differences. CSM was more strongly related to outcome (-13.9 points on the OMAS; 95% confidence interval (CI) -21.9 to -5.4) than RM (-5.5 points; 95% CI -9.8 to -1.2). Existing malunion thresholds for talar tilt and tibiofibular clear space were shown to be slightly conservative; new thresholds which better explain function were identified (talar tilt > 2.4°; tibiofibular clear space > 6 mm). Based on this new definition the presence of RM had an impact on function, which was statistically significant, but the clinical significance was uncertain (-9.1 points; 95% CI -13.8 to -4.4). In subsequent analysis, RM of a posterior malleolar fracture was shown to have a statistically significant impact on OMAS change scores, but the clinical significance was uncertain (-11.6 points; 95% CI -21.9 to -0.6). Conclusion. These results provide clinical evidence which supports the previously accepted definitions. Further research to investigate more conservative clinical thresholds for malunion is indicated. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(10):841–849

Aims. The aim of this study was to investigate whether on-demand removal (ODR) is noninferior to routine removal (RR) of syndesmotic screws regarding functional outcome. Methods. Adult patients (aged above 17 years) with traumatic syndesmotic injury, surgically treated within 14 days of trauma using one or two syndesmotic screws, were eligible (n = 490) for inclusion in this randomized controlled noninferiority trial. A total of 197 patients were randomized for either ODR (retaining the syndesmotic screw unless there were complaints warranting removal) or RR (screw removed at eight to 12 weeks after syndesmotic fixation), of whom 152 completed the study. The primary outcome was functional outcome at 12 months after screw placement, measured by the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS). Results. There were 152 patients included in final analysis (RR = 73; ODR = 79). Of these, 59.2% were male (n = 90), and the mean age was 46.9 years (SD 14.6). Median OMAS at 12 months after syndesmotic fixation was 85 (interquartile range (IQR) 60 to 95) for RR and 80 (IQR 65 to 100) for ODR. The noninferiority test indicated that the observed effect size was significantly within the equivalent bounds of -10 and 10 scale points (p < 0.001) for both the intention-to-treat and per-protocol, meaning that ODR was not inferior to RR. There were significantly more complications in the RR group (12/73) than in the ODR group (1/79) (p = 0.007). Conclusion. ODR of the syndesmotic screw is not inferior to routine removal when it comes to functional outcome. Combined with the high complication rate of screw removal, this offers a strong argument to adopt on demand removal as standard practice of care after syndesmotic screw fixation. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(11):1709–1716

Aims. The aim of this study was to compare the longer-term outcomes of operatively and nonoperatively managed patients treated with a removable brace (fixed-angle removable orthosis) or a plaster cast immobilization for an acute ankle fracture. Methods. This is a secondary analysis of a multicentre randomized controlled trial comparing adults with an acute ankle fracture, initially managed either by operative or nonoperative care. Patients were randomly allocated to receive either a cast immobilization or a fixed-angle removable orthosis (removable brace). Data were collected on baseline characteristics, ankle function, quality of life, and complications. The Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) was the primary outcome which was used to measure the participant’s ankle function. The primary endpoint was at 16 weeks, with longer-term follow-up at 24 weeks and two years. Results. Overall, 436 patients (65%) completed the final two-year follow-up. The mean difference in OMAS at two years was -0.3 points favouring the plaster cast (95% confidence interval -3.9 to 3.4), indicating no statistically significant difference between the interventions. There was no evidence of differences in patient quality of life (measured using the EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire) or Disability Rating Index. Conclusion. This study demonstrated that patients treated with a removable brace had similar outcomes to those treated with a plaster cast in the first two years after injury. A removable brace is an effective alternative to traditional immobilization in a plaster cast for patients with an ankle fracture. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(4):382–388

Aims. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of two different postoperative management approaches following surgical fixation of ankle fractures: traditional cast immobilization versus the Early Motion and Directed Exercise (EMADE) programme. Methods. A total of 157 patients aged 18 years or older who underwent successful open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of Weber B (AO44B) ankle fractures were recruited to this randomized controlled trial. At two weeks post-surgical fixation, participants were randomized to either light-weight cast-immobilization or the EMADE programme, consisting of progressive home exercises and weekly advice and education. Both groups were restricted to non-weightbearing until six weeks post-surgery. The primary outcome was assessed using the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) questionnaire at 12 weeks post-surgery, with secondary measures at two, six, 24, and 52 weeks. Exploratory cost-effectiveness analyses were also performed. Results. Overall, 130 participants returned their 12-week OMAS questionnaires. The mean OMAS was significantly higher in the EMADE group compared with the immobilized group (62.0 (SD 20.9) vs 48.8 (SD 22.5)), with a clinically meaningful mean difference of 13.2 (95% CI 5.66 to 20.73; p < 0.001). These differences were maintained at week 24, with convergence by week 52. No intervention-related adverse events, including instability, were reported. Conclusion. The EMADE programme demonstrated an accelerated recovery compared to traditional six-week cast immobilization for those who have undergone ORIF surgery to stabilize Weber B (AO44B) ankle fractures. The study found the EMADE intervention to be safe. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(9):949–956

Aims. Treatment of Weber B ankle fractures that are stable on weightbearing radiographs but unstable on concomitant stress tests (classified SER4a) is controversial. Recent studies indicate that these fractures should be treated nonoperatively, but no studies have compared alternative nonoperative options. This study aims to evaluate patient-reported outcomes and the safety of fracture treatment using functional orthosis versus cast immobilization. Methods. A total of 110 patients with Weber B/SER4a ankle fractures will be randomized (1:1 ratio) to receive six weeks of functional orthosis treatment or cast immobilization with a two-year follow-up. The primary outcome is patient-reported ankle function and symptoms measured by the Manchester-Oxford Foot and Ankle Questionnaire (MOxFQ); secondary outcomes include Olerud-Molander Ankle Score, radiological evaluation of ankle congruence in weightbearing and gravity stress tests, and rates of treatment-related adverse events. The Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research (approval number 277693) has granted ethical approval, and the study is funded by South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority (grant number 2023014). Discussion. Randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate alternative nonoperative treatment options for Weber B/SER4a ankle fractures, as current clinical guidelines are based on biomechanical reasoning. The findings will be shared through publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at conferences. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(9):713–719

Aims. The primary aim of this study was to present the mid-term follow-up of a multicentre randomized controlled trial (RCT) which compared the functional outcome following routine removal (RR) to the outcome following on-demand removal (ODR) of the syndesmotic screw (SS). Methods. All patients included in the ‘ROutine vs on DEmand removal Of the syndesmotic screw’ (RODEO) trial received the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS), American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Hindfoot Score (AOFAS), Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS), and EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D). Out of the 152 patients, 109 (71.7%) completed the mid-term follow-up questionnaire and were included in this study (53 treated with RR and 56 with ODR). Median follow-up was 50 months (interquartile range 43.0 to 56.0) since the initial surgical treatment of the acute syndesmotic injury. The primary outcome of this study consisted of the OMAS scores of the two groups. Results. The median OMAS score was 85.0 for patients treated with RR, and 90.0 for patients treated with ODR (p = 0.384), indicating no significant difference between ODR and RR. The secondary outcome measures included the AOFAS (88.0 in the RR group and 90.0 for ODR; p = 0.722), FAOS (87.5 in the RR group and 92.9 for ODR; p = 0.399), and EQ-5D (0.87 in the RR group and 0.96 for ODR; p = 0.092). Conclusion. This study demonstrated no functional difference comparing ODR to RR in syndesmotic injuries at a four year follow-up period, which supports the results of the primary RODEO trial. ODR should be the standard practice after syndesmotic screw fixation. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(12):957–963

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

Aims

Lower limb reconstruction (LLR) has a profound impact on patients, affecting multiple areas of their lives. Many patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are employed to assess these impacts; however, there are concerns that they do not adequately capture all outcomes important to patients, and may lack content validity in this context. This review explored whether PROMs used with adults requiring, undergoing, or after undergoing LLR exhibited content validity and adequately captured outcomes considered relevant and important to patients.

Aims

Ankle fracture is one of the most common musculoskeletal injuries sustained in the UK. Many patients experience pain and physical impairment, with the consequences of the fracture and its management lasting for several months or even years. The broad aim of ankle fracture treatment is to maintain the alignment of the joint while the fracture heals, and to reduce the risks of problems, such as stiffness. More severe injuries to the ankle are routinely treated surgically. However, even with advances in surgery, there remains a risk of complications; for patients experiencing these, the associated loss of function and quality of life (Qol) is considerable. Non-surgical treatment is an alternative to surgery and involves applying a cast carefully shaped to the patient’s ankle to correct and maintain alignment of the joint with the key benefit being a reduction in the frequency of common complications of surgery. The main potential risk of non-surgical treatment is a loss of alignment with a consequent reduction in ankle function. This study aims to determine whether ankle function, four months after treatment, in patients with unstable ankle fractures treated with close contact casting is not worse than in those treated with surgical intervention, which is the current standard of care.

The October 2024 Foot & Ankle Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Hemiarthroplasty for hallux rigidus; Fixed or mobile-bearing ankle arthroplasty? A meta-analysis; Bone grafting for periprosthetic bone cysts following total ankle arthroplasty; Diabetic foot ulcer after first-ray amputation; Early motion after ankle surgery: the path to faster recovery?; Are podiatrists and orthopaedic surgeons approaching zone 2 fifth metatarsal fractures in the same way?.

The October 2023 Foot & Ankle Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Risk factors for failure of total ankle arthroplasties; Effects of synovial fluid fracture haematoma to tissue-engineered cartilage; Coronal plane deformity in CMT-cavovarus feet using automated 3D measurements; Immediate weightbearing after ankle fracture fixation – is it safe?; Unlocking the mystery of Mueller-Weiss disease; Diabetic foot management: predictors of failure.

The April 2024 Foot & Ankle Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Safety of arthroscopy combined with radial extracorporeal shockwave therapy for osteochondritis of the talus; Bipolar allograft transplantation of the ankle; Identifying risk factors for osteonecrosis after talar fracture; Balancing act: immediate versus delayed weightbearing in ankle fracture recovery; Levelling the field: proximal supination osteotomy’s efficacy in severe and super-severe hallux valgus; Restoring balance: how adjusting the tibiotalar joint line influences movement after ankle surgery.

The June 2024 Trauma Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Skin antisepsis before surgical fixation of limb fractures; Comparative analysis of intramedullary nail versus plate fixation for fibula fracture in supination external rotation type IV ankle injury; Early weightbearing versus late weightbearing after intramedullary nailing for distal femoral fracture (AO/OTA 33) in elderly patients: a multicentre propensity-matched study; Long-term outcomes with spinal versus general anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery; Operative versus nonoperative management of unstable medial malleolus fractures: a randomized clinical trial; Impact of smoking status on fracture-related infection characteristics and outcomes; Reassessing empirical antimicrobial choices in fracture-related infections; Development and validation of the Nottingham Trauma Frailty Index (NTFI) for older trauma patients.

The August 2023 Trauma Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: A comparison of functional cast and volar-flexion ulnar deviation for dorsally displaced distal radius fractures; Give your stable ankle fractures some AIR!; Early stabilization of rib fractures – an effective thing to do?; Locked plating versus nailing for proximal tibia fractures: A multicentre randomized controlled trial; Time to flap coverage in open tibia fractures; Does tranexamic acid affect the incidence of heterotropic ossification around the elbow?; High BMI – good or bad in surgical fixation of hip fractures?

Aims

To describe outcome reporting variation and trends in non-pharmacological randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of distal tibia and/or ankle fractures.

Aims

A pilon fracture is a severe ankle joint injury caused by high-energy trauma, typically affecting men of working age. Although relatively uncommon (5% to 7% of all tibial fractures), this injury causes among the worst functional and health outcomes of any skeletal injury, with a high risk of serious complications and long-term disability, and with devastating consequences on patients’ quality of life and financial prospects. Robust evidence to guide treatment is currently lacking. This study aims to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of two surgical interventions that are most commonly used to treat pilon fractures.