Literature DB >> 29298255

Randomized Trial Comparing Suture Button with Single Syndesmotic Screw for Syndesmosis Injury.

Mette Renate Andersen1, Frede Frihagen2, Johan Castberg Hellund2, Jan Erik Madsen2, Wender Figved1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study compared clinical and radiographic results between patients who underwent stabilization of an acutely injured syndesmosis with a suture button (SB) and those treated with 1 quadricortical syndesmotic screw (SS).
METHODS: Ninety-seven patients, 18 to 70 years old, with an ankle injury that included the syndesmosis were randomized to 2 groups: SB (48 patients) and SS (49). The main outcome measure was the score on the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot scale. The secondary outcome measures were the Olerud-Molander Ankle (OMA) score, visual analog scale (VAS), and EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) Index and VAS. Computed tomography (CT) scans of both ankles were obtained at 2 weeks and 1 and 2 years after surgery. Both groups were allowed partial weight-bearing at 2 weeks and full weight-bearing at 6 weeks. The mean time for SS removal was 85.9 days (range, 39 to 132 days) after surgery. The patients were followed at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 and 2 years. Two years of follow-up were completed for 87 (90%) of the patients (46 in the SB group and 41 in the SS group).
RESULTS: The SS group had more injuries to the posterior malleolus than the SB group. At 2 years, the median AOFAS score was higher in the SB group than in the SS group (96 [interquartile range, or IQR, 90 to 100] versus 86 [IQR, 80 to 96]; p = 0.001), as was the median OMA score (100 [IQR, 95 to 100] versus 90 [IQR, 75 to 100]; p < 0.001). The SB group reported less pain during walking at 2 years than the SS group (median VAS score, 0 [IQR, 0 to 1] versus 1 [IQR, 0 to 2]; p = 0.008) and less pain during rest (median VAS score, 0 [IQR, 0 to 0] versus 0 [IQR, 0 to 1]; p = 0.04). There was no difference between treatments groups with regard to pain at night or during daily activities at 2 years. The SB group had a higher median EQ-5D Index score at 2 years (1.0 [IQR, 1 to 1] versus 0.88 [IQR, 0.8 to 1.0]; p = 0.005). Twenty of 40 patients in the SS group had a difference in the tibiofibular distance of ≥2 mm between the injured and uninjured ankles at 2 years, compared with 8 of 40 in the SB group (p = 0.009). Seven patients in the SS group had symptomatic recurrent syndesmotic diastasis during the treatment period compared with none in the SB group (p = 0.005).
CONCLUSIONS: The patients treated with an SB had higher AOFAS scores, OMA scores, and EQ-5D Index scores as well as lower (better) VAS scores for pain during walking and pain during rest. Also, the SB group had less widening seen radiographically at 2 years than did the patients in the SS group. No differences in the scores for pain at night or during daily activities were identified. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29298255     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.16.01011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  26 in total

1.  Sagittal ankle position does not affect axial CT measurements of the syndesmosis in a cadaveric model.

Authors:  Ashley E Levack; Aleksey Dvorzhinskiy; Elizabeth B Gausden; Matthew R Garner; Stephen J Warner; Peter D Fabricant; Dean G Lorich
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2019-05-27       Impact factor: 3.067

2.  Dynamic fixation is superior in terms of clinical outcomes to static fixation in managing distal tibiofibular syndesmosis injury.

Authors:  Kaifeng Gan; Dingli Xu; Keqi Hu; Wei Wu; Yandong Shen
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2019-08-17       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 3.  [Syndesmosis injuries at the ankle].

Authors:  S Rammelt; E Manke
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 1.000

Review 4.  [Treatment of ankle fractures: operative techniques : Standards, tips and pitfalls].

Authors:  Konrad Kamin; Dmitri Notov; Christian Kleber; Onays Al-Sadi; Stefan Rammelt
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 1.000

5.  Current status of the management of isolated syndesmotic injuries in Germany.

Authors:  Manuel Mutschler; Jan-Hendrik Naendrup; Thomas R Pfeiffer; Vera Jaecker; Dariusch Arbab; Sven Shafizadeh; Tomas Buchhorn
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2022-04-11       Impact factor: 3.067

6.  A 10-Year Follow-Up of Ankle Syndesmotic Injuries: Prospective Comparison of Knotless Suture-Button Fixation and Syndesmotic Screw Fixation.

Authors:  Jan Niklas Altmeppen; Christian Colcuc; Christian Balser; Yves Gramlich; Alexander Klug; Oliver Neun; Sebastian Manegold; Reinhard Hoffmann; Sebastian Fischer
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-04-30       Impact factor: 4.964

7.  [Treatment of ankle fractures : Standards, tricks and pitfalls].

Authors:  Konrad Kamin; Dmitri Notov; Onays Al-Sadi; Christian Kleber; Stefan Rammelt
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 1.000

Review 8.  A meta-analysis comparing the outcomes of syndesmotic injury treated with metal screw, dynamic fixation, and bioabsorbable screw.

Authors:  Jiayong Liu; Gautam Pathak; Mihir Joshi; Kyle Andrews; Joseph Lee
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2021-04-24

9.  [Research progress in diagnosis and treatment of distal tibiofibular syndesmosis injury].

Authors:  Hui Huang; Yunfeng Yang
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2020-10-15

10.  [Comparison of bioabsorbable screw and metallic screw for Maisonneuve fracture].

Authors:  Xiaodong Wen; Jun Lu; Hongmou Zhao; Yi Li; Xin Chang; Yan Zhang; Jingqi Liang; Xiaojun Liang
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2020-04-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.