A novel reconstruction technique for chronic lateral ankle instability: comparison to primary repair

Abstract

Twenty patients with lateral ankle instability were treated by a novel anatomical reconstruction technique (group A) and the results compared with 20 patients (group B) who, during the same period of time, underwent primary repair of ruptured lateral ligaments of the ankle. We reviewed 15 patients from group A and 17 patients from group B at a mean follow-up of between 2 and 4 years. The mean functional scores were good in both groups without significant difference, and there was no difference in the mean anterior talar translation between the two groups. We therefore conclude that chronic lateral instability of the ankle may be successfully treated, even in the presence of severely damaged, attenuated or absent ligament tissue.Résumé Vingt malades avec entorse à répétition par inversion et instabilité latérale de la cheville documentée ont été traitée avec une nouvelle technique de reconstruction anatomique (groupe A). Nous avons comparé les résultats avec 20 malades (groupe B) qui pendant la même période avait eu une réparation primaire des ligaments latéraux de la cheville. Nous avons examiné de nouveau 15 malades de groupe A, et 17 malades de groupe B avec un délai de 2 à 4 années dans les deux groupes. Les scores fonctionnels moyens étaient sans différence significative et classifiés comme bon. La translation antérieure moyenne d'astragale était aussi sans différence significative. Basé sur ces résultats, nous croyons que l'instabilité latérale de la cheville peut être traitée avec succès même si le tissu ligamentaire est sévèrement endommagé ou absent.

Hemi-Castaing ligamentoplasty for the treatment of chronic lateral ankle instability: a retrospective assessment of outcome

“…of patientsFollow-up (years)ClassTechniqueScoreGood+excellentMesser et al [35]20002234.5ARMod. Broström/GouldKarlsson90.9Paterson et al [43]2000262ARSemitendinosisNA81Krips et al [31]200018530AR3 techniquesKarlsson/Good/Tegner70–85Krips et al [30]200125 vs 2912.3AR vs NARAR vs EvansGood92 vs 69Nimon et al [39]2001919.7NAREvansKarlsson/Good/AOFAS57Krips et al [29]200241 vs 365.4AR vs NARAR vs EvansGood/Tegner88 vs 58Krips et al [28]200254 vs 4520AR vs NARAR vs EvansKarlsson/Good69.6 vs 33.3Sugimoto et al [48]2002132.2NARPatellar tendonGood100Järvelä et al [23]200217 vs 153.1ARKarlsson vs AITFLKarlsson93 vs 94Korkala et al [27]2002251.7NAREvansGood80Cheng and Tho [11]2002153NARChrisman-SnooksKaikkonen93Jarde et al [22]2002465.7NARCastaingAOFAS82Solakoglu et al [46]2003141.7NARCovilleChrisman-Snooks100Takahashi et al [49]2003…”

Sporcularda ayak bileği dış yan bağ yaralanmalarında güncel yaklaşımlar

“…Otogreft, allogreft, greft tespit seçenekleri ve teknik ayrıntıları birbirinden farklı pek çok metod tanımlanmıştır. [45][46][47][48] Kim ve ark., 2015 yılında yayımladıkları çalışmada, minik pencerelerden peroneus longus tendonun ön yarısını aldıktan sonra ATFL ve CFL rekonstrüksiyonunda kullanmış ve %81 mükemmel veya iyi sonuç bulmuşlardır. [49] Bu çalışmada, 34 hastanın Bu implant, dizde patella çıkıklarının tespiti veya mediyal kollateral bağ tamirinin desteklenmesi için bir süredir kullanılmaktadır.…”