Pietro Spennacchio1, Davide Cucchi2,3, Pietro S Randelli1,4, Niek C van Dijk5. 1. IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy. 2. IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy. d.cucchi@gmail.com. 3. Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche per la Salute, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli 31, 20133, Milan, Italy. d.cucchi@gmail.com. 4. Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche per la Salute, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli 31, 20133, Milan, Italy. 5. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam Zuid-Oost, The Netherlands.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The 2-portal hindfoot endoscopic technique with the patient in prone position, first introduced by van Dijk et al. (Arthroscopy 16:871-876, 2000), is currently the most used by foot and ankle surgeons to address endoscopically pathologies located in the hindfoot. This article aims to review the literature to provide a comprehensive description of the level of evidence available to support the use of the 2-portal hindfoot endoscopy technique for the current generally accepted indications. METHODS: A comprehensive review was performed by use of the PubMed database to isolate literature that described therapeutic studies investigating the results of different hindfoot endoscopy treatment techniques. All articles were reviewed and assigned a classification (I-V) of level of evidence. An analysis of the literature reviewed was used to assign a grade of recommendation for each current generally accepted indication for hindfoot endoscopy. A subscale was used to further describe the evidence base for indications receiving a grade of recommendation indicating poor-quality evidence. RESULTS: On the basis on the available evidence, posterior ankle impingement syndrome, subtalar arthritis and retrocalcaneal bursitis have the strongest recommendation in favour of treatment (grade Cf). CONCLUSION: Although a low level of evidence of the included studies, the review showed that adequate literature to support the use of the 2-portal endoscopic techniques for most currently accepted indications exists. Future "higher quality" evidence could strengthen current recommendations and further help surgeons in evidence-based practice. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, Review of Level III, IV and V studies.
PURPOSE: The 2-portal hindfoot endoscopic technique with the patient in prone position, first introduced by van Dijk et al. (Arthroscopy 16:871-876, 2000), is currently the most used by foot and ankle surgeons to address endoscopically pathologies located in the hindfoot. This article aims to review the literature to provide a comprehensive description of the level of evidence available to support the use of the 2-portal hindfoot endoscopy technique for the current generally accepted indications. METHODS: A comprehensive review was performed by use of the PubMed database to isolate literature that described therapeutic studies investigating the results of different hindfoot endoscopy treatment techniques. All articles were reviewed and assigned a classification (I-V) of level of evidence. An analysis of the literature reviewed was used to assign a grade of recommendation for each current generally accepted indication for hindfoot endoscopy. A subscale was used to further describe the evidence base for indications receiving a grade of recommendation indicating poor-quality evidence. RESULTS: On the basis on the available evidence, posterior ankle impingement syndrome, subtalar arthritis and retrocalcaneal bursitis have the strongest recommendation in favour of treatment (grade Cf). CONCLUSION: Although a low level of evidence of the included studies, the review showed that adequate literature to support the use of the 2-portal endoscopic techniques for most currently accepted indications exists. Future "higher quality" evidence could strengthen current recommendations and further help surgeons in evidence-based practice. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, Review of Level III, IV and V studies.
Authors: Mathieu Thaunat; Xavier Bajard; Philippe Boisrenoult; Philippe Beaufils; Philippe Oger Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2011-12-16 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Ruben Zwiers; Johannes I Wiegerinck; Christopher D Murawski; Niall A Smyth; John G Kennedy; C Niek van Dijk Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 2013-03-29 Impact factor: 4.772