ABSTRACT
Introduction Open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) and primary arthrodesis are two conventional options for the treatment of Lisfranc injuries. However, they are associated with implant-related complications. An alternative suspensory device construct using interosseous nonabsorbable sutures with endobuttons has been described with satisfactory results. This study aims to explore functional outcomes after suture button fixation of Lisfranc injuries in a Southeast Asian population. Methods This was a single-surgeon retrospective study of patients with Lisfranc injuries treated surgically using a suture button fixation technique between 2017 and 2019. Data collected included demographic information, pre-injury levels of activity, nature of injury, and type of surgery performed. The minimum postoperative follow-up was one year. The Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) and Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) were used to evaluate patient-reported outcomes. Scores were reported in percentage (%) with median and interquartile range. Results Twenty-nine patients with a mean age of 29 years (21-76) were recruited. Sixteen underwent suture button fixation only (SB), and 13 underwent suture button fixation with intercuneiform screw fixation and plating (SBM). The median scores for the FAOS and FAAM questionnaires were at least 80% in all domains. Twenty-eight patients (97%) were able to return to pre-injury activity level, 27 patients (93%) were able to return to sports. Only one patient was not satisfied with the outcomes of surgery. No patients had post-traumatic arthritis or hardware failure necessitating implant removal at the final follow-up. Conclusion This study has demonstrated that treatment of Lisfranc injuries with a suspensory device construct resulted in good outcomes with 97% of patients being able to return to pre-injury activity levels, and 93% of patients being able to return to sports. It may not be necessary to perform primary arthrodesis in uncomplicated Lisfranc injuries. This technique is also advantageous as implant removal is not routinely required due to the design and biomechanical properties of suspensory devices.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Personal mobility devices (PMDs) have become increasingly popular as a modality of transport worldwide. Starting out as novelty toys, PMDs are gradually being adopted as the mainstream mode of travel. There is an increasing number of accidents involving both PMD riders and other road users since its introduction, leading to a concomitant increase in demand for healthcare resources to manage the injuries. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the inpatient cost and the orthopedic injury pattern due to PMD accidents. METHODS: All patients admitted to the Department of Orthopedic Surgery between December 2016 to February 2018 with injuries due to PMD accidents were recruited. Data collection was performed retrospectively on the demographic profiles, injury patterns, admission related outcomes and expenditures of these patients. RESULTS: 43 patients were included in this study. The mean duration of admission was 7.81 days and the median cost of admission was S$7835.01 (approximately US$5620). These were comparable to accidents arising from other modes of transport, such as motorcycles and bicycles. In addition, more than 80% of patients were not wearing protective gear at time of accident. These patients had a slightly higher median cost payable per patient as compared to those who donned protective gear, with a difference of S$1669.78 (approximately US$1221). CONCLUSION: There is a significant health and financial cost to the individual and society from PMD injuries and admission. This can be reduced with strict regulations on PMD use, advocating protective gear use, and promoting awareness on safety measures and the consequences of PMD accidents. The most common injury mechanism and orthopedic injury type for PMD accidents are different from motorcycle accidents.
