| Literature DB >> 32462007 |
Huarui Yang1, Kangquan Shou1, Shijun Wei2, Zhi Fang1, Qiwen Hu1, Qiong Wan3, Yi Yang1, Tongzhu Bao1.
Abstract
Osteochondroma is one of the most common benign bone tumor; however, the surgical treatment still remains a challenge for those that occur at the distal tibiofibular interosseous location. Previously, the transfibular approach has been successfully described, but the potential damage of the syndesmosis would give rise to the instability of the ankle joint and thus may result in the unfavorable long-term outcome. Here, a revised strategy which can protect the syndesmotic complex is introduced. From 2010 to 2017, eleven patients with the distal tibiofibular interosseous osteochondroma who underwent the revised surgery were collected. The distal fibular osteotomy and posterior tibial osteotomy were performed to keep the inferior syndesmosis intact for better stability of the ankle joint. Both the anterior tibiofibular ligaments (AITFL) and posterior tibiofibular ligaments (PITFL) have been preserved successfully, and thus, the stability of the ankle joint has been maintained due to our strategy. The VAS and AOFAS scores were utilized to assess the clinical outcome and function. Postoperatively, all the patients were pain-free and were able to wear the appropriate shoes at the last follow-up. Preoperative and postoperative AOFAS scores were 93.63 ± 6.91 and 47.27 ± 5.27 (P < 0.05), respectively. Moreover, the average VAS score was 1.73 ± 0.27 (compared with preoperative as 7.45 ± 2.15, P < 0.05), demonstrating obvious improvement after the operation. To our best knowledge, this is the first time to perform the resection of the distal tibial interosseous osteochondroma involving the fibula without interrupting the inferior syndesmotic complex especially the AITFL and PITFL. We believe that this strategy may pave a new way for optimized clinical outcome for these patients with distal tibiofibular interosseous osteochondroma. This clinical trial study is registered with number ChiCTR1900024690.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32462007 PMCID: PMC7231068 DOI: 10.1155/2020/6371456
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
The clinical information of the patients.
| Case | Gender | Age | Side | Radiographic test | Symptoms |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | F | 17 | L | X-ray, CT | Pain |
| 2 | M | 19 | L | X-ray, CT | Pain |
| 3 | F | 29 | L | X-ray, CT | Pain when wearing the boots |
| 4 | F | 21 | R | MRI, CT | Painful lump |
| 5 | M | 18 | R | X-ray, CT | Pain |
| 6 | M | 32 | L | X-ray, CT | Restriction of joint motion |
| 7 | F | 20 | R | X-ray, CT | Painful lump |
| 8 | M | 43 | L | X-ray, CT | Restriction of joint motion |
| 9 | M | 28 | R | X-ray, CT | Painful lump, restriction of joint motion |
| 10 | M | 31 | R | X-ray, CT | Painful lump, restriction of joint motion |
| 11 | M | 24 | L | X-ray, CT | Painful lump |
M: male; F: female; L: left; R: right; CT: computerized tomographic scanning; MRI: magnetic resonance imaging.
Figure 1Illustration of the detailed surgical procedure. AITFL: anterior tibiofibular ligament; PITFL: posterior tibiofibular ligament; CFL: calcaneofibular ligament; ATFL: anterior talofibular ligament.
Visual Analogue Scale score and grade.
| Case | Period | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preoperative | 3 months post operation | 1 year post operation | ||||
| Score | Grade | Score | Grade | Score | Grade | |
| 1 | 9 | Poor | 4 | Good | 1 | Good |
| 2 | 8 | Poor | 7 | Poor | 4 | Fair |
| 3 | 7 | Poor | 3 | Good | 1 | Good |
| 4 | 7 | Poor | 2 | Good | 0 | Good |
| 5 | 7 | Poor | 2 | Good | 1 | Good |
| 6 | 9 | Poor | 4 | Good | 2 | Good |
| 7 | 7 | Poor | 3 | Good | 3 | Good |
| 8 | 6 | Fair | 5 | Fair | 2 | Good |
| 9 | 8 | Poor | 5 | Fair | 1 | Good |
| 10 | 8 | Poor | 4 | Fair | 2 | Good |
| 11 | 6 | Fair | 2 | Good | 1 | Good |
| Average score | 7.45 ± 2.15 | 3.73 ± 0.33∗ | 1.73 ± 0.27# | |||
| Good rate | — | 63.6% | 90.9%∗ | |||
Compared with preoperative VAS score, ∗P < 0.05, #P < 0.01. Compared with 3 months follow-up, ∗P < 0.05.
AOFAS score and grade.
| Case | Period | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before operation | 3 months post operation | 1 year post operation | ||||
| Score | Grade | Score | Grade | Score | Grade | |
| 1 | 49 | Poor | 71 | Fair | 95 | Excellent |
| 2 | 22 | Poor | 48 | Poor | 89 | Good |
| 3 | 42 | Poor | 84 | Good | 96 | Excellent |
| 4 | 37 | Poor | 73 | Fair | 94 | Excellent |
| 5 | 57 | Fair | 89 | Good | 97 | Excellent |
| 6 | 34 | Poor | 67 | Fair | 91 | Excellent |
| 7 | 42 | Poor | 72 | Fair | 92 | Excellent |
| 8 | 61 | Fair | 86 | Good | 95 | Excellent |
| 9 | 63 | Fair | 82 | Good | 91 | Excellent |
| 10 | 58 | Fair | 79 | Good | 94 | Excellent |
| 11 | 45 | Poor | 88 | Good | 96 | Excellent |
| Average score | 47.27 ± 5.27 | 80.99 ± 4.33∗ | 93.63 ± 6.91# | |||
Compared with preoperative VAS score, ∗P < 0.05, #P < 0.01.
Figure 2Preoperative ((a) anteroposterior; (b) lateral; (c) CT scan with one layer) and postoperative ((d) day 1 after surgery; (e) 6 weeks after surgery, the Kirschner wires have been removed) radiographs from a 32-year-old man. It is noted that the posterior tibial osteotomy was used to retract the Volkmann tuberosity, which was reduced back anatomically to preserve the inferior tibiofibular syndesmosis intact. The lateral photograph at the final follow-up showed good range of motion of ankle joint (FnnG).
Figure 3Preoperative ((a) CT scan with three-dimensional reconstruction and one layer) and postoperative ((b) anteroposterior and lateral X-ray) radiographs from a 29-year-old woman. Preoperative ((c) CT scan) and postoperative ((d) anteroposterior and lateral X-ray) radiographs from a 24-year-old man.