Functional results of patients with ankle syndesmosis injuries treated with the dynamic fixation (the syndesmosis TightRope® suture button) compared to the rigid fixation

被引:0
作者
Maljkovic, Filip
Slavkovic, Nemanja [1 ]
Jovanovic, Zelimir
Jovanovic, Nemanja
Pavlovic, Vedrana [2 ]
Krivokapic, Branislav [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Banj Inst Orthoped Surg, Mihaila Avramovica 28, Belgrade 11000, Serbia
[2] Univ Belgrade, Fac Med, Belgrade, Serbia
关键词
ankle syndesmosis injuries; dynamic fixation; rigid fixation; AOFAS score; TIBIOFIBULAR SYNDESMOSIS; COMPLICATION RATE; SCREW FIXATION; FRACTURES; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.2298/SARH240624069M
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction/Objective Sprains account for 85% of all ankle injuries. Syndesmosis injuries occur in 1-18% of patients with ankle sprains and are more common in contact sports involving forced foot dorsiflexion. Methods In our study, we compared 30 patients treated with dynamic fixation for acute syndesmotic injury with patients treated with rigid fixation. The criteria for comparison were: American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle Hindfoot Scale, visual analogue scale (VAS), EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D), range of motion, complications and reoperations. Results The mean AOFAS score for patients treated with rigid fixation was 88.6, while the mean score for patients treated with dynamic fixation was 91.6. The mean VAS score for rigid fixation was 83.5, while it was 85.8 for dynamic fixation. Infection as a complication of rigid fixation was present in two patients (11.8%), while it was absent in the dynamic fixation group. The need for implant removal occurred in two patients treated with rigid fixation (11.8%) and in one patient treated with dynamic fixation (7.7%). Conclusion Based on our results and the results reported by other authors, we prove that there is a lower incidence of problems related to implants and the need for the implant removal with dynamic fixation, based on the results of AOFAS score, we notice better and faster recovery with dynamic fixation as well.
引用
收藏
页码:481 / 485
页数:5
相关论文
共 29 条
  • [1] Biomechanical evaluation of syndesmotic fixation techniques via finite element analysis: Screw vs. suture button
    Alastuey-Lopez, Diego
    Seral, Belen
    Angeles Perez, Ma
    [J]. COMPUTER METHODS AND PROGRAMS IN BIOMEDICINE, 2021, 208 (208)
  • [2] High complication rate after syndesmotic screw removal
    Andersen, Mette Renate
    Frihagen, Frede
    Madsen, Jan Erik
    Figved, Wender
    [J]. INJURY-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE CARE OF THE INJURED, 2015, 46 (11): : 2283 - 2287
  • [3] Anatomy of the tibiofibular syndesmosis and its clinical relevance
    Bartonícek, J
    [J]. SURGICAL AND RADIOLOGIC ANATOMY, 2003, 25 (5-6) : 379 - 386
  • [4] Bawady AH, 2023, BMFJ, V40, P112, DOI [10.21608/bmfj.2022.20545.1183, DOI 10.21608/BMFJ.2022.20545.1183]
  • [5] Castro Michael D, 2002, Foot Ankle Clin, V7, P679, DOI 10.1016/S1083-7515(02)00049-9
  • [6] Lower complication rate and faster return to sports in patients with acute syndesmotic rupture treated with a new knotless suture button device
    Colcuc, Christian
    Blank, Marc
    Stein, Thomas
    Raimann, Florian
    Weber-Spickschen, Sanjay
    Fischer, Sebastian
    Hoffmann, Reinhard
    [J]. KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 2018, 26 (10) : 3156 - 3164
  • [7] Differences in gait analysis and clinical outcome after TightRope® or screw fixation in acute syndesmosis rupture: study protocol for a prospective randomized pilot study
    Doll, Julian
    Waizenegger, Stefan
    Bruckner, Thomas
    Schmidmaier, Gerhard
    Wolf, Sebastian I.
    Fischer, Christian
    [J]. TRIALS, 2020, 21 (01)
  • [8] Ankle Instability
    Ferran, Nicholas A.
    Oliva, Francesco
    Maffulli, Nicola
    [J]. SPORTS MEDICINE AND ARTHROSCOPY REVIEW, 2009, 17 (02) : 139 - 145
  • [9] Garrick J G, 1977, Am J Sports Med, V5, P241, DOI 10.1177/036354657700500606
  • [10] Golano Pau, 2006, Foot Ankle Clin, V11, P275, DOI 10.1016/j.fcl.2006.03.003