Ankle fractures with syndesmotic stabilisation are associated with a high rate of secondary osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: The primary aim of this study was to present the incidence of clinically significant end stage osteoarthritis (cOA) after syndesmotic fixation of ankle fractures. The secondary aim was to and identify independent predictors of cOA. METHODS: A retrospective review of consecutive patients presenting to a single University affiliated institution between March 2008 and May 2010 was undertaken. Inclusion criteria were ankle fractures with syndesmotic stabilisation. Patients were excluded if pre or postoperative radiographs were missing or were lost to follow up. Data were gathered regarding demographics, fracture pattern, fixation methods, reduction parameters, screw removal, revision surgery, complications and cOA up to seven years post injury. RESULTS: Data were available for 120 patients (86%). In total, 13 patients (11%) developed cOA. Univariate analysis showed that increasing age, open fracture, malreduction of the syndesmosis, removal of symptomatic screws, revision surgery and complications were predictors of developing cOA. Cox regression analysis revealed increasing age (hazard ratio (HR) 1.09, p=0.006), and malreduction (HR 45.5, p=0.001) were independent predictors of developing cOA. CONCLUSIONS: Ankle fractures with syndesmotic stabilisation represent a severe injury with a high rate of cOA. The only modifiable risk factor for developing cOA in this large series of patients was radiological malalignment. When syndesmotic stabilisation is required, careful intraoperative assessment should be undertaken to ensure the syndesmosis is reduced.

Return to sport following Lisfranc injuries: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Information regarding return rates (RR) and mean return times (RT) to sport following Lisfranc injuries remains limited. METHODS: A systematic search of nine major databases was performed to identify all studies which recorded RR or RT to sport following lisfranc injuries. RESULTS: Seventeen studies were included (n=366). For undisplaced (Stage 1) injuries managed nonoperatively (n=35), RR was 100% and RT was 4.0 (0-15) wks. For stable minimally-displaced (Stage 2) injuries managed nonoperatively (n=16), RR was 100% and RT was 9.1 (4-14) wks. For the operatively-managed injuries, Percutaneous Reduction Internal Fixation (PRIF) (n=42), showed significantly better RR and RT compared to both: Open Reduction Internal Fixation (ORIF) (n=139) (RR - 98% vs 78%, p<0.019; RT - 11.6 wks vs 19.6 wks, p<0.001); and Primary Partial Arthrodesis (PPA) (n=85) (RR - 98% vs 85%, p<0.047; RT - 11.6 wks vs 22.0 wks, p<0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Stage 1 and stable Stage 2 Lisfranc injuries show good results with nonoperative management. PRIF offers the best RR and RT from the operative methods, though this may not be possible with high-energy injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV. Systematic Review of Level I to Level IV Studies.

The use of a nerve stimulator to allow safe placement of Ilizarov wires.

OBJECTIVE: Avoidance of potential iatrogenic nerve injury during insertion of Ilizarov fine wires into areas of high anatomic risk by using a modified nerve stimulation technique. INDICATIONS: Application of the Ilizarov ring fixator to areas of high anatomic hazard, in situations where anatomic topography may be distorted by previous surgery, trauma, or congenital anomalies. CONTRAINDICATIONS: Use of systemic muscle relaxants. Caution in patient with cardiac pacemaker. SURGICAL TECHNIQUE: Preliminary experiments showed that a standard nerve-stimulating device can deliver a negatively charged, monophasic square pulse of current through Ilizarov wires. During the application of an Ilizarov frame to potentially hazardous anatomic regions, providing no systemic muscle relaxants are used, a voltage field sufficient to cause nerves in close proximity to the Ilizarov wire to depolarize is produced. Identification of a distal muscle twitch provoked by the stimulation may indicate a potential for iatrogenic nerve injury. RESULTS: Results show that with the nerve stimulator set at 2.5 mA (pulsed at a frequency of 2 Hz), peripheral nerves are stimulated if they lie within 5 mm of the wires. Should a distal muscle twitch occur, wires should be repositioned so that equivalent stimulation produces no twitch. The technique was used during Ilizarov frame application in ten patients, with only a single occurrence of distal muscle twitches in a lower-leg frame. Following repositioning of the Ilizarov wire in this case, no further twitches were observed, indicating that no Ilizarov wire was inserted close to peripheral nerves. No neurologic impairment was present postoperatively.