S Rammelt1, E Manke2. 1. UniversitätsCentrum für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Deutschland. Stefan.Rammelt@uniklinikum-dresden.de. 2. UniversitätsCentrum für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden, Deutschland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Injuries to the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis are frequent and continue to generate controversy due to an extensive range of diagnostic techniques and therapeutic options. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review is to summarize the current knowledge on syndesmotic instability and to present some recommendations for the clinical practice for acute an chronic injuries. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Analysis of the current literature concerning the anatomy, etiology, diagnostics and treatment of syndesmosis injuries. RESULTS: Purely ligamentous injuries (high ankle sprains) are not associated with a latent or frank tibiofibular diastasis and can be treated with an extended protocol of physiotherapy. Relevant instability of the syndesmosis with diastasis results from rupture of two or more ligaments and requires surgical stabilization. Syndesmotic disruptions are commonly associated with bony avulsions or malleolar fractures. Treatment consists of anatomic reduction of the distal fibula into the corresponding incisura of the distal tibia and stable fixation. The proposed means of fixation are one or more tibiofibular screws or suture button implants. There is no consensus on how long to maintain fixation. Both syndesmotic screws and suture buttons need to be removed if symptomatic. The most frequent complication is syndesmotic malreduction and can be minimized with direct visualization and intraoperative 3D scanning. Other complications include hardware failure, adhesions, heterotopic ossification, tibiofibular synostosis, chronic instability and posttraumatic arthritis. CONCLUSION: The single most important prognostic factor after unstable injury of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis with or without fracture is the anatomic reduction of the distal fibula and fitting into the tibial incisura.
BACKGROUND: Injuries to the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis are frequent and continue to generate controversy due to an extensive range of diagnostic techniques and therapeutic options. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review is to summarize the current knowledge on syndesmotic instability and to present some recommendations for the clinical practice for acute an chronic injuries. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Analysis of the current literature concerning the anatomy, etiology, diagnostics and treatment of syndesmosis injuries. RESULTS: Purely ligamentous injuries (high ankle sprains) are not associated with a latent or frank tibiofibular diastasis and can be treated with an extended protocol of physiotherapy. Relevant instability of the syndesmosis with diastasis results from rupture of two or more ligaments and requires surgical stabilization. Syndesmotic disruptions are commonly associated with bony avulsions or malleolar fractures. Treatment consists of anatomic reduction of the distal fibula into the corresponding incisura of the distal tibia and stable fixation. The proposed means of fixation are one or more tibiofibular screws or suture button implants. There is no consensus on how long to maintain fixation. Both syndesmotic screws and suture buttons need to be removed if symptomatic. The most frequent complication is syndesmotic malreduction and can be minimized with direct visualization and intraoperative 3D scanning. Other complications include hardware failure, adhesions, heterotopic ossification, tibiofibular synostosis, chronic instability and posttraumatic arthritis. CONCLUSION: The single most important prognostic factor after unstable injury of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis with or without fracture is the anatomic reduction of the distal fibula and fitting into the tibial incisura.
Authors: Attila Vasarhelyi; Jessica Lubitz; Philip Gierer; Georg Gradl; Klaus Rösler; Werner Hopfenmüller; Kaj Klaue; Thomas W F Mittlmeier Journal: Foot Ankle Int Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 2.827
Authors: Mélissa Laflamme; Etienne L Belzile; Luc Bédard; Michel P J van den Bekerom; Mark Glazebrook; Stéphane Pelet Journal: J Orthop Trauma Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 2.512
Authors: Michael J Gardner; Demetris Demetrakopoulos; Stephen M Briggs; David L Helfet; Dean G Lorich Journal: Foot Ankle Int Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 2.827
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