| Literature DB >> 28231779 |
Sander Verhage1, Peer van der Zwaal2, Maarten Bronkhorst2, Huub van der Meulen3, Sanne Kleinveld3, Sven Meylaerts2, Steven Rhemrev2, Pieta Krijnen4, Inger Schipper4, Jochem Hoogendoorn2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Guidelines for treatment of the posterior fracture fragment in trimalleolar fractures are scarce and show varying advices. Did the increasing size of the posterior fragment seem to relate to worse outcome in the past, nowadays this has changed to the amount of dislocation of the posterior fragment post-operatively. Despite many retrospective cohort studies and some prospective cohort studies, no consistent guideline could be derived from the current literature.Entities:
Keywords: Ankle fracture; Posterior fragment fixation; Posterior malleolar fracture; Posterolateral approach; Trimalleolar fracture
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28231779 PMCID: PMC5324206 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-017-1445-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
| Inclusion criteria | |
| 1. >18 and <70 years at time of inclusion | |
| 2. AO 44-B3 fracture with medium-sized posterior fragment | |
| 3. First ankle fracture of affected side | |
| Exclusion criteria | |
| 1. Severely traumatized patients (ISS > 16) | |
| 2. Multiple fractures | |
| 3. Ankle fractures of the same ankle in the history | |
| 4. Patients with pre-existent mobility problems | |
| 5. Pre-existent disability | |
| 6. Patients with follow-up in another hospital | |
| 7. Insufficient understanding of the Dutch language |
Fig. 1Flow-chart of inclusion and randomisation
Measurements during follow-up
| Post-operative | 6 weeks | 12 weeks | 26 weeks | 1 year | 5 years | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| × | × | × | × | ||
|
| × | |||||
|
| × | × | × | × | ||
|
| × | × | × | |||
|
| × | × | × | |||
|
| × | × | × | × | × | |
|
| × | × | × | × | × | |
|
| × | × | × | X |