Dataset Information

Anatomic Repair vs Closed Reduction of the Syndesmosis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The goal of the study was to compare radiographic and functional outcomes between conventional closed syndesmotic reduction and screw fixation with open reduction, direct repair of the anterior inferior tibiofibular ligament (AiTFL) and screw fixation. We hypothesized that open reduction with restoration of the AiTFL would provide an improved reduction with better radiographic and functional outcomes.

Methods

Fifty consecutive patients with OTA 44-C ankle fractures were enrolled. Treatment was nonrandomized and based on surgeon preference. Patients were treated with either open reduction, suture-anchor AiTFL repair, and screw fixation (ART group), or conventional closed reduction of the syndesmosis followed by screw fixation (CR group). The primary outcome measure was anteroposterior (AP) displacement of the fibula on CT scan at 3 months postoperatively. Secondary outcome measures included the Maryland Foot Score, the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle Hindfoot Score, and the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS).

Results

Mean AP difference between injured and noninjured ankles was decreased in the ART group compared with the CR group (0.7 ± 0.3 mm vs 1.5 ± 0.3 mm, P = .008). No differences were observed between groups in overall scores for secondary outcome measures. The ART group displayed a significant difference in Maryland Foot Shoe subscore at 12 months (ART = 9.5 vs CR = 8.3, P = .03) and FAOS Quality of Life subscore at 12 months (64.1 compared to 38.3, P = .04).

Conclusion

Open anatomic syndesmotic repair resulted in improved radiographic outcomes compared with closed reduction. Cosmesis was worse at 6 weeks compared to the CR group; however, quality of life and shoewear were improved in the ART group at 1 year postoperatively.

Level of evidence

Level II, prospective comparative study.

SUBMITTER: Del Balso C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8293725 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceThe burden of injury and costs of wrist fractures are substantial. Surgical treatment became popular without strong supporting evidence.ObjectiveTo assess whether current surgical treatment for displaced distal radius fractures provided better patient-reported wrist pain and function than nonsurgical treatment in patients 60 years and older.Design, setting, and participantsIn this multicenter randomized clinical trial and parallel observational study, 300 eligible patients were screened from 19 centers in Australia and New Zealand from December 1, 2016, until December 31, 2018. A total of 166 participants were randomized to surgical or nonsurgical treatment and followed up at 3 and 12 months by blinded assessors. Those 134 individuals who declined randomization were included in a parallel observational cohort with the same treatment options and follow-up. The primary analysis was intention to treat; sensitivity analyses included as-treated and per-protocol analyses.InterventionSurgical treatment was open reduction and internal fixation using a volar-locking plate (VLP). Nonsurgical treatment was closed reduction and cast immobilization (CR).Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation score at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire score, health-related quality of life, pain, major complications, patient-reported treatment success, bother with appearance, and therapy use.ResultsIn the 300 study participants (mean [SD] age, 71.2 [7.5] years; 269 [90%] female; 166 [81 VLP and 85 CR] in the randomized clinical trial sample and 134 [32 VLP and 102 CR] in the observational sample), no clinically important between-group difference in 12-month Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation scores (mean [SD] score of 19.8 [21.1] for VLP and 21.5 [24.3] for CR; mean difference, 1.7 points; 95% CI -5.4 to 8.8) was observed. No clinically important differences were found in quality of life, wrist pain, or bother at 3 and 12 months. No significant difference was found in total complications between groups (12 of 84 [14%] for the CR group vs 6 of 80 [8%] for the VLP group; risk ratio [RR], 0.53; 95% CI, 0.21-1.33). Patient-reported treatment success favored the VLP group at 12 months (very successful or successful: 70 [89%] vs 57 [70%]; RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.07-1.48; P = .005). There was greater use of postoperative physical therapy in the VLP group (56 [72%] vs 44 [54%]; RR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.04-1.69; P = 0.02).Conclusions and relevanceThis randomized clinical trial found no between-group differences in improvement in wrist pain or function at 12 months from VLP fixation over CR for displaced distal radius fractures in older people.Trial registrationhttp://anzctr.org.au identifier: ACTRN12616000969460.

Project description:PurposeRecently, a new suture-button fixation device has emerged for the treatment of acute distal tibiofibular syndesmotic injuries and its use is rapidly increasing. The current systematic review was undertaken to compare the biomechanical properties, functional outcome, need for implant removal, and the complication rate of syndesmotic disruptions treated with a suture-button device with the current 'gold standard', i.e. the syndesmotic screw.MethodA literature search in the electronic databases of the Cochrane Library, EMbase, Pubmed Medline, and Google Scholar, between January 1st 2000 to December 1st 2011, was conducted to identify studies in which unstable ankle fractures with concomitant distal tibiofibular syndesmotic injury were treated with either a syndesmotic screw or a suture-button device.ResultsA total of six biomechanical studies, seven clinical full-text studies and four abstracts on the TightRope system, and 27 studies on syndesmotic screw or bolt fixation were identified. The AOFAS of 133 patients treated with TightRope was 89.1 points, with an average study follow-up of 19 months. The AOFAS score in studies with 253 patients treated with syndesmotic screws (metallic and absorbable) or bolts was 86.3 points, with an average study follow-up of 42 months. Two studies reported an earlier return to work in the TightRope group. Implant removal was reported in 22 (10%) of 220 patients treated with a TightRope (range, 0-25%), in the screw or bolt group the average was 51.9% of 866 patients (range, 5.8-100%).ConclusionThe TightRope system has a similar outcome compared with the syndesmotic screw or bolt fixation, but might lead to a quicker return to work. The rate of implant removal is lower than in the syndesmotic screw group. There is currently insufficient evidence on the long-term effects of the TightRope and more uniform outcome reporting is desirable. In addition, there is a need for studies on cost-effectiveness of the treatment of acute distal tibiofibular syndesmotic disruption treated with a suture-button device.

Project description:BackgroundStabilization methods for distal tibiofibular syndesmotic injuries present risk of malreduction. We compared reduction accuracy and biomechanical properties of a new syndesmotic reduction and stabilization technique using 2 suture buttons placed through a sagittal tunnel in the fibula and across the tibia just proximal to the incisura with those of the conventional method.MethodsSyndesmotic injury was created in 18 fresh-frozen cadaveric lower leg specimens. Nine ankles were repaired with the conventional method and 9 with the new technique. Reduction for the conventional method was performed using thumb pressure under direct visualization and for the new method by tightening both suture buttons passed through the fibular and tibial tunnels. Computed tomography was used to assess reduction accuracy. Torsional resistance, fibular rotation, and fibular translation were evaluated during biomechanical testing.ResultsThe new technique showed less lateral translation of the fibula on CT measurements after reduction (0.06 ± 0.06 mm) than the conventional method (0.26 ± 0.31 mm), P = .02. The new technique produced less fibular rotation during internal rotation after 0 cycles (new -2.4 ± 1.4 degrees; conventional -5.0 ± 1.2 degrees, P = .001), 100 cycles (new -2.1 ± 1.9 degrees; conventional -4.6 ± 1.4 degrees, P = .01), and 500 cycles (new -2.2 ± 1.6 degrees; conventional -5.3 ± 2.5 degrees, P = .01) and during external rotation after 100 cycles (new 3.9 ± 3.3 degrees; conventional 5.9 ± 3.5 degrees, P = .02) and 500 cycles (new 3.3 ± 3.2 degrees; conventional 6.3 ± 2.6 degrees, P = .03). Fixation failed in 3 specimens.ConclusionThe new syndesmotic reduction and fixation technique resulted in more accurate reduction of the fibula in the tibial incisura in the coronal plane and better rotational stability compared with the conventional method.Clinical relevanceThis new technique of syndesmosis reduction and stabilization may be a reliable alternative to current methods.