Bin Song1, Changchuan Li2, Zhong Chen1, Rui Yang1, Jingyi Hou1, Weiquan Tan1, Weiping Li3. 1. Department of Sports Medicine, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China. 2. Department of Orthopaedics, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China. 3. Department of Sports Medicine, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China sportsmedcenter@163.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We introduce a novel method of combining the standard anteromedial and anterolateral approaches and dual posterolateral approaches in the arthroscopic treatment of posterior and anterior ankle impingement syndrome and compare the postoperative outcomes with conventional anteromedial/anterolateral and posteromedial/posterolateral approaches. METHODS: From January 2013 to January 2015, we treated 28 patients with posterior and anterior ankle impingement syndrome by arthroscopy. The patients were divided into the conventional group (n = 13) and the modified group (n = 15) according to the surgical approaches used in the operation. Preoperative and postoperative American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, visual analog scale (VAS) score, range of ankle motion, and operation time were recorded. The average follow-up was 16 months (range 6-24 months). RESULTS: Posterior and anterior ankle impingement syndrome was confirmed arthroscopically in all patients. After the operation, the range of ankle motion in all patients was restored. There was no significant difference in postoperative AOFAS score, VAS score, dorsiflexion, and plantarflexion between the conventional group and the modified group. Moreover, the operation time was significantly reduced in the modified group compared with the conventional group. There was no recurrence of osteophyte and no complications such as infection, neurovascular injury, or delayed healing of surgical incision in the modified group. CONCLUSIONS: Dual posterolateral approaches combined with standard anteromedial and anterolateral approaches was a novel method for arthroscopic treatment of posterior and anterior ankle impingement syndrome. It proved to be safe and effective, and significantly reduced the operation time. Reposition, repeated prep and drape, and limb distraction were avoided. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, retrospective case series.
BACKGROUND: We introduce a novel method of combining the standard anteromedial and anterolateral approaches and dual posterolateral approaches in the arthroscopic treatment of posterior and anterior ankle impingement syndrome and compare the postoperative outcomes with conventional anteromedial/anterolateral and posteromedial/posterolateral approaches. METHODS: From January 2013 to January 2015, we treated 28 patients with posterior and anterior ankle impingement syndrome by arthroscopy. The patients were divided into the conventional group (n = 13) and the modified group (n = 15) according to the surgical approaches used in the operation. Preoperative and postoperative American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, visual analog scale (VAS) score, range of ankle motion, and operation time were recorded. The average follow-up was 16 months (range 6-24 months). RESULTS: Posterior and anterior ankle impingement syndrome was confirmed arthroscopically in all patients. After the operation, the range of ankle motion in all patients was restored. There was no significant difference in postoperative AOFAS score, VAS score, dorsiflexion, and plantarflexion between the conventional group and the modified group. Moreover, the operation time was significantly reduced in the modified group compared with the conventional group. There was no recurrence of osteophyte and no complications such as infection, neurovascular injury, or delayed healing of surgical incision in the modified group. CONCLUSIONS: Dual posterolateral approaches combined with standard anteromedial and anterolateral approaches was a novel method for arthroscopic treatment of posterior and anterior ankle impingement syndrome. It proved to be safe and effective, and significantly reduced the operation time. Reposition, repeated prep and drape, and limb distraction were avoided. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, retrospective case series.