Background: Unstable Lisfranc injuries are best treated with anatomic reduction and stable fixation. There are controversies regarding which type of stabilization is best. In the present study, we compared primary arthrodesis of the first tarsometatarsal (TMT) joint to temporary bridge plating in unstable Lisfranc injuries. Methods: Forty-eight patients with Lisfranc injuries were included and followed for 2 years. Twenty-four patients were randomized to primary arthrodesis (PA) of the medial 3 TMT joints, whereas 24 patients were randomized to temporary bridge plate (BP) over the first TMT joint and primary arthrodesis of the second and third TMT joints. The main outcome parameter was the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot scale and the secondary outcome parameters were the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) and visual analog scale for pain (VAS pain). Computed tomography (CT) scans pre- and postoperatively were obtained. Radiographs were obtained at follow-ups. Pedobarographic examination was performed at the 2-year follow-up. Twenty-two of 24 patients in the PA and 23/24 in the BP group completed the 2-year follow-up. Results: The mean AOFAS midfoot score 2 years postoperatively was 89 (SD 9) in the PA group and 85 (SD 15) in the BP group ( P = .32). There were no significant differences between the groups with regard to SF-36 or VAS pain scores. The alignment of the first metatarsal was better in the BP group than in the PA group measured by the anteroposterior Meary angle ( P = .04). The PA group had a reduced peak pressure under the fifth metatarsal ( P = .047). In the BP group, 11/24 patients had radiologic signs of osteoarthritis in the first TMT joint. Conclusion: Both treatment groups had good outcome scores. The first metatarsal was better aligned in the BP group; however, there was a high incidence of radiographic osteoarthritis in this group. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic level I, prospective randomized controlled study.

Better outcome for suture button compared with single syndesmotic screw for syndesmosis injury: five-year results of a randomized controlled trial.

Background: Tension band wiring (TBW) is the standard method for treating transverse olecranon fractures, but high rates of complications and reoperations have been reported. Plate fixation (PF) with locking screws has been introduced as an alternative method that may retain the fracture reduction better with a higher load to failure. Methods: Twenty paired cadaveric elbows were used. All soft tissues except for the triceps tendon were removed. A standardized transverse fracture was created, and each pair was allocated randomly to TBW or PF with locking screws. The triceps tendon was mounted to the materials testing machine with the elbow in 90 of flexion. Construct stiffness was compared 3 times. Then, the elbows underwent a chair lift-off test by loading the triceps tendon to 300 N for 500 cycles. Finally, a load-to-failure test was performed, and failure mechanism was recorded. Results: The construct stiffness of PF was higher in the first of 3 measurements. No difference was observed in the cyclic test or in load to failure. Hardware failure was the failure mechanism in 8 of 10 TBW constructs, and all failures occurred directly under the twists of the metal wire. Hardware failure was the cause of failure in only 1 elbow in the PF group (P < .01). Conclusion:There was no difference in fracture displacement following fixation with TBW and PF with locking screws in transverse olecranon fractures. However, assessment of the mode of hardware failure identified the metal cerclage twist as the weakest link in the TBW construct.