Alexandra J Brown1, Yoshiharu Shimozono2, Eoghan T Hurley3, John G Kennedy4. 1. Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, U.S.A. 2. Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, U.S.A.; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Teikyo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan. 3. Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, U.S.A.; Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland. 4. Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York, U.S.A.. Electronic address: kennedyj@hss.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the current studies on arthroscopic lateral ankle ligament repair for chronic lateral ankle instability. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases was performed during August 2017. Included studies were evaluated with regard to level of evidence (LOE) and quality of evidence (QOE) using the Coleman Methodology Score. Variable reporting outcome data, clinical outcomes, and percentage of patients who returned to sport at previous level were also evaluated. RESULTS: Eight studies for a total of 269 ankles were included; 87.5% of studies were LOE III or IV, and the QOE in all studies was of poor or fair quality. Preoperative American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) scores ranged from 41.2 to 69.9, and postoperative AOFAS scores ranged from 90.2 to 98. All studies using AOFAS score showed an increase in postoperative outcome score of 22.8 to 54.2 at a mean follow-up of 17.1 months. Five studies used Karlsson-Peterson scores with mean postoperative score of 88.5 (range, 76.2-93.6) at a mean follow-up of 21.2 months. The comparative studies showed similar clinical outcomes between arthroscopic and open procedures. The overall complication rate was 11.6% in the included studies. The overall rate of return to sport was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: The current systematic review demonstrated that arthroscopic lateral ankle ligament repair yields favorable clinical outcomes in the short term. However, there is no clinical evidence to support the advantages of the arthroscopic procedure over the open procedure, and there are no long-term data currently available for the arthroscopic procedure. There was a relatively high complication rate (11.5%) associated with the arthroscopic procedures, although recent comparative studies demonstrated similar complication rates for both open and arthroscopic techniques. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I, III, and IV studies.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the current studies on arthroscopic lateral ankle ligament repair for chronic lateral ankle instability. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases was performed during August 2017. Included studies were evaluated with regard to level of evidence (LOE) and quality of evidence (QOE) using the Coleman Methodology Score. Variable reporting outcome data, clinical outcomes, and percentage of patients who returned to sport at previous level were also evaluated. RESULTS: Eight studies for a total of 269 ankles were included; 87.5% of studies were LOE III or IV, and the QOE in all studies was of poor or fair quality. Preoperative American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) scores ranged from 41.2 to 69.9, and postoperative AOFAS scores ranged from 90.2 to 98. All studies using AOFAS score showed an increase in postoperative outcome score of 22.8 to 54.2 at a mean follow-up of 17.1 months. Five studies used Karlsson-Peterson scores with mean postoperative score of 88.5 (range, 76.2-93.6) at a mean follow-up of 21.2 months. The comparative studies showed similar clinical outcomes between arthroscopic and open procedures. The overall complication rate was 11.6% in the included studies. The overall rate of return to sport was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: The current systematic review demonstrated that arthroscopic lateral ankle ligament repair yields favorable clinical outcomes in the short term. However, there is no clinical evidence to support the advantages of the arthroscopic procedure over the open procedure, and there are no long-term data currently available for the arthroscopic procedure. There was a relatively high complication rate (11.5%) associated with the arthroscopic procedures, although recent comparative studies demonstrated similar complication rates for both open and arthroscopic techniques. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I, III, and IV studies.