Matteo Guelfi1,2,3, Gustavo Araujo Nunes4,5,6, Francesc Malagelada7, Guillaume Cordier6,8, Miki Dalmau-Pastor5,6, Jordi Vega5,6,9. 1. Casa di Cura Villa Montallegro, Genoa, Italy. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery "Gruppo Policlinico di Monza," Clinica Salus, Alessandria, Italy. 3. Human Anatomy and Embryology Unit, Department of Morphological Sciences, Universitad Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 4. Hospital Belo Horizonte, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil. 5. Human Anatomy and Embryology Unit, Department of Pathology and Experimental Therapeutics, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 6. GRECMIP (Groupe de Recherche et d'Etude en Chirurgie Mini-Invasive du Pied) Soon MIFAS (Minimally Invasive Foot and Ankle Society), Merignac, France. 7. Department of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, Royal London Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK. 8. Orthopaedic Department, Mérignac Sports Clinic, Mérignac, France. 9. Foot and Ankle Unit, Orthopedic Department, iMove Tres Torres, Barcelona, Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Both the percutaneous technique with arthroscopic assistance, also known as arthroscopic Broström (AB), and the arthroscopic all-inside ligament repair (AI) are widely used to treat chronic lateral ankle instability. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of these 2 arthroscopic stabilizing techniques. METHODS: Thirty-nine consecutive patients were arthroscopically treated for chronic ankle instability by 2 different surgeons. The AB group comprised 20 patients with a mean age of 30.2 (range, 18-42) years and a mean follow-up of 19.6 (range, 12-28) months. The AI group comprised 19 patients with a mean age of 30.9 (range, 18-46) years and mean follow-up of 20.7 (range, 13-32) months. Functional outcomes using the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) hindfoot score and visual analog pain scale (VAS) were assessed pre- and postoperatively. Range of motion (ROM) and complications were recorded. RESULTS: In both groups the AOFAS and VAS scores significantly improved compared with preoperative values (P < .001) with no difference (P > .1) between groups. In the AB group the mean AOFAS score improved from 67 (range, 44-87) to 92 (range, 76-100) and the mean VAS score from 6.4 (range, 3-10) to 1.2 (range, 0-3). In the AI group the mean AOFAS score changed from 60 (range, 32-87) to 93 (range, 76-100) and the mean VAS score from 6.1 (range, 4-10) to 0.8 (range, 0-3). At the final follow-up 8 complications (40%) were recorded in the AB group. In the AI group 1 complication (5.3%) was observed (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Both the AB and AI techniques are suitable surgical options to treat chronic ankle instability providing excellent clinical results. However, the AB had a higher overall complication rate than the AI group, particularly involving a painful restriction of ankle plantarflexion and neuritis of the superficial peroneal nerve. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.
BACKGROUND: Both the percutaneous technique with arthroscopic assistance, also known as arthroscopic Broström (AB), and the arthroscopic all-inside ligament repair (AI) are widely used to treat chronic lateral ankle instability. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of these 2 arthroscopic stabilizing techniques. METHODS: Thirty-nine consecutive patients were arthroscopically treated for chronic ankle instability by 2 different surgeons. The AB group comprised 20 patients with a mean age of 30.2 (range, 18-42) years and a mean follow-up of 19.6 (range, 12-28) months. The AI group comprised 19 patients with a mean age of 30.9 (range, 18-46) years and mean follow-up of 20.7 (range, 13-32) months. Functional outcomes using the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) hindfoot score and visual analog pain scale (VAS) were assessed pre- and postoperatively. Range of motion (ROM) and complications were recorded. RESULTS: In both groups the AOFAS and VAS scores significantly improved compared with preoperative values (P < .001) with no difference (P > .1) between groups. In the AB group the mean AOFAS score improved from 67 (range, 44-87) to 92 (range, 76-100) and the mean VAS score from 6.4 (range, 3-10) to 1.2 (range, 0-3). In the AI group the mean AOFAS score changed from 60 (range, 32-87) to 93 (range, 76-100) and the mean VAS score from 6.1 (range, 4-10) to 0.8 (range, 0-3). At the final follow-up 8 complications (40%) were recorded in the AB group. In the AI group 1 complication (5.3%) was observed (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Both the AB and AI techniques are suitable surgical options to treat chronic ankle instability providing excellent clinical results. However, the AB had a higher overall complication rate than the AI group, particularly involving a painful restriction of ankle plantarflexion and neuritis of the superficial peroneal nerve. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.