Background: There is an ongoing discussion on how to best stabilize syndesmotic injuries. Previous studies have indicated a better quality of reduction of the distal tibiofibular joint (DTFJ) for the suture button systems compared to syndesmotic screw fixation. Still, the reason for this superiority remains unclear. The aims of this retrospective study were to (1) analyze the deviation of the tibial and fibular drilling tunnels of the suture button system and (2) to compare these to the quality of reduction of the DTFJ assessed on bilateral postoperative CT images. Methods: Included were all adult patients who underwent syndesmotic stabilization for an acute injury using a suture button system, with postoperative, bilateral CT imaging over a 10-year period. A total of 147 patients were eligible. Based on individually reconstructed axial CT slices, the postoperative quality of reduction of the DTFJs was rated on bilateral CT images. Furthermore, the rotation and translation of the suture button drilling tunnels were analyzed. Based on these measurements, the intraoperative reduction of the DTFJ was recalculated and again rated. Using these values, the correction potential of suture button systems on the reduction of the DTFJ was analyzed. Results: (1) The drilling tunnel deviated considerably for both rotation |2.3±2.1 degrees| (range: |0.0-13.1 degrees|) and translation |0.9±0.8 mm| (range: |0-4.3 mm|). Based on the deviation of the drilling tunnels in fibula and tibia, the calculated intraoperative reduction of the DTFJ was classified as malreduced in 35.4%. (2) The DTFJ was postoperatively identified as malreduced in 17% of patients. Overall, the suture button system tended to compensate toward a more anatomical reduction both in the axial and sagittal plane. Conclusion: A suture button system postoperatively deviates and apparently has the capacity to compensate for intraoperative malreduction. Analysis of the drilling tunnels revealed that the use of a rigid fixation system would have doubled the postoperative malreduction rate.
Purpose The aim was to conduct a systematic literature review and meta-anaylsis to analyze the diagnostic accuracy of the external rotation stress test (ERST) for syndesmotic injuries. Methods The systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA-P guidelines (Prospero ID: CRD42021282457). Four common databases were searched from inception to September 29, 2021. Eligible were any studies facilitating the ERST under fluoroscopy in a defined state of syndesmotic instability. Syndesmotic ligament-specific rupture must have been proven by MRI, arthroscopy, or controlled dissection (cadaver study). Two reviewers independently conducted each step of the systematic literature review. The risk of bias was assessed by the Quality Appraisal for Cadaveric Studies Score scale. The data analysis was performed qualitatively and quantitatively. Results Eight studies were eligible for a qualitative analysis, and six studies were eligible for a quantitative analysis. All studies included were cadaver studies. The qualitative analysis comprised 94 specimens and revealed considerable heterogeneity. Six studies allowed for a quantitative analysis of the tibiofibular clear space (TFCS) and five studies for the medial clear space (MCS) during the ERST. The quantitative analysis of the TFCS revealed no significant differences between intact and any stage of syndesmotic injury. The MCS was able to differentiate between intact and 2-ligament- (Z = 2.04, P = 0.02), 3-ligament- (Z = 3.2, P = 0.001), and 3-ligament + deltoid ruptures (Z = 3.35, P < 0.001). Conclusion The ERST is the only noninvasive test to assess syndesmotic instability and can be conducted bilaterally. The uninjured contralateral side can serve as a baseline reference. Based on the conducted quantitative analysis, the MCS seems to be able to differentiate between stable (intact/1-ligament) and unstable (2-ligament/3-ligament) lesions.
Background: The quality of reduction of the distal tibiofibular joint (DTFJ) has a major impact on the outcome. Novel suture-button systems as well as intraoperative 3D imaging can be applied to increase the quality of DTFJ reduction intraoperatively. The individual effect of either remains unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the value of intraoperative 3D imaging on the quality of reduction of the DTFJ when using a suture-button system. Methods: Retrospective, radiographic study including adult patients who underwent surgical stabilization of the syndesmosis with a suture-button system for acute, unilateral, unstable syndesmotic injuries with postoperative bilateral CT imaging. The use of an intraoperative 3D scan was the individual surgeon’s choice. Assessed was whether the intraoperative 3D imaging had an influence on the postoperative quality of DTFJ reduction and revision rates. These findings were put in perspective to the correction potential of the suture-button system. Results: A total of 147 patients were included; 76 of these received an intraoperative 3D imaging. Neither the rate of formal malreduction (17% vs 17%) nor the postoperative revision rate (4% vs 3%) differed significantly between patients with or without intraoperative 3D imaging. Intraoperative 3D imaging revealed a false-negative rate of 14%. The intrinsic correction potential of the suture-button system reduced the number of formally malreduced DTFJs in both groups by 51%. Conclusion: The additional value of intraoperative 3D imaging to assess the quality of DTFJ reduction in our series did not improve syndesmotic reduction when using a flexible suture-button system. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective radiological study.
Purpose The purposes of the study were to (1) analyze the shape of the distal fibula at the location of syndesmotic stabilization and to (2) define safe zones at the distal-lateral fibula for three different drilling tunnel orientations: anteriorly-, posteriorly angulated and center-center. Methods Postoperative, bilateral CT images of adult patients that underwent syndesmotic stabilization (suture-button system) for an acute, unilateral ankle injury were analyzed. Manual axial CT reconstructions of the uninjured side were generated. First, the axial shape of the distal fibula was classified. The aspect ratio between the anterio-lateral and the posterior-lateral surfaces of the fibula was calculated to assess symmetry. Second, the same axial planes were used to define the safe zones. Each drilling-tunnel orientation (anterior, central, posterior) comprised a fixed medial tibial anchor point and a safe zone on the lateral fibula. For each of the three orientations, the most anteriorly and posteriorly drilling tunnel location was simulated. Next to a cumulative visual analysis, a quantitative analysis of the most anterior and posterior point on the anterio- and posterior-lateral surfaces was calculated. Results A total of 96 CT datasets were analyzed. (1) 81% of fibulae revealed a triangular convex-, 10% an irregular-, and 8% a quadrilateral shape. The lateral surface ratio was 1.0 ± 0.2 (range: 0.7–1.5), not differing between the fibula types (n.s.). (2) The safe corridor on the lateral surface of the fibula for an anteriorly angulated drilling tunnel was − 8% to − 41%, for a posteriorly angulated drilling tunnel was 0% to 46%, and for a center-center alignment − 7 ± 11% (range: − 28 to 18%). Conclusion The meta-diaphyseal region of the distal fibula revealed a homogeneous crosssectional shape. The lateral apex of the fibula can serve as a landmark defining safe zones to place the drilling tunnels correctly. Applying these safe zones in clinical practice could help to avoid the misplacement of the syndesmotic fixation device. Level of evidence Level III, retrospective radiographic study.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.