Literature DB >> 29409215

Syndesmotic stability: Is there a radiological normal?-A systematic review.

A Anand Prakash1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Syndesmotic injury and instability poses a diagnostic challenge with unreliable clinical tests and inconsistent radiologic measures. Thus, used widely in clinical practice, there is huge debate pertaining to the reliability and validity of the radiologic parameters used for syndesmotic instability.
OBJECTIVE: Hence the purpose of the review was to explore the normal radiologic measures and morphometrics of distal tibiofibular syndesmosis and its relationships, which can aid in diagnosing syndesmotic instability.
METHOD: Computerised literature searches was performed for articles published in English using Pubmed, from inception through June 2016. All published articles reporting the normal anatomic and morphometric measures of distal tibiofibular syndesmosis with the use of any radiological modality individually or in combination, either in cadaveric or in live subjects were included. Studies done on or reporting of measures in healthy ankles or radiologically normal ankles were only included.
RESULTS: In this review wide anatomic and morphologic variability was observed amidst the landmarks used commonly for assessing syndesmotic instability and hence the normal measures. Further age and gender based variations were seen across the most commonly used radiologic measures for syndesmotic instability diagnosis, demanding the modification of existing radiologic criteria.
Copyright © 2017 European Foot and Ankle Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CT; Diagnosis; Diastasis; Instability; Review; Syndesmosis; Ultrasound; radiograph

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29409215     DOI: 10.1016/j.fas.2017.02.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Foot Ankle Surg        ISSN: 1268-7731            Impact factor:   2.705


  6 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.  Radiographic parameters of the normal ankle syndesmosis: Comparison between hindfoot alignment view and anteroposterior view.

Authors:  Jaehyung Lee; Ho Seong Lee; Ji Wan Kim; Bum-Sik Lee; Youngrak Choi
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2022-05       Impact factor: 1.573

3.  Volume measurements on weightbearing computed tomography can detect subtle syndesmotic instability.

Authors:  Soheil Ashkani Esfahani; Rohan Bhimani; Bart Lubberts; Gino M Kerkhoffs; Gregory Waryasz; Christopher W DiGiovanni; Daniel Guss
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2021-04-19       Impact factor: 3.494

4.  Arthroscopic coronal plane syndesmotic instability has been over-diagnosed.

Authors:  Noortje C Hagemeijer; Mohamed Abdelaziz Elghazy; Gregory Waryasz; Daniel Guss; Christopher W DiGiovanni; Gino M M J Kerkhoffs
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2020-05-25       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 5.  Ankle and syndesmosis instability: consensus and controversies.

Authors:  Nuno Corte-Real; João Caetano
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2021-06-28

6.  Four-Dimensional CT Analysis of Normal Syndesmotic Motion.

Authors:  Murray T Wong; Charmaine Wiens; Jeremy Lamothe; W Brent Edwards; Prism S Schneider
Journal:  Foot Ankle Int       Date:  2021-06-04       Impact factor: 2.827

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.