Literature DB >> 9278748

Ankle fractures involving the fibula proximal to the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis.

N A Ebraheim1, A O Mekhail, S S Gargasz.   

Abstract

Thirty-two cases of ankle fractures associated with fibular fractures above the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis were studied. All were treated with open reduction and internal fixation. The average follow-up was 25 months. The results of the postoperative evaluation were rated, based on subjective clinical criteria, as good, fair, and poor. According to the Lauge-Hansen classification, there were 17 (53%) cases of supination-external rotation injury (2 stage 2 and 15 stage 4), 9 (28%) cases of stage 3 pronation-abduction injury, and 6 (19%) cases of pronation-external rotation injury (3 stage 3 and 3 stage 4). All cases could be classified as Weber type C or as suprasyndesmotic, fibular diaphyseal fracture (44-C) according to the Orthopaedic Trauma Association classification. In 18 (56%) cases, the fracture was associated with ankle dislocation. There were seven (22%) open fractures, (two grade I, four grade II, and one grade IIIA). Syndesmotic screws were used in 23 (72%) cases (12 supination-external rotation injury, 6 pronation-external rotation injury, and 5 pronation-abduction injury). The syndesmotic screw was removed after an average of 9 weeks. Four (13%) nonunions and two (6%) delayed unions of the fibula were treated with bone grafting and/or hardware revision and eventually healed. Three of the nonunions had poor clinical results because of degenerative ankle joint arthritis in two (one of them ended in arthrodesis) and deep infection, which was eventually cured, in the third. The fourth nonunion had a fair result. One of the delayed unions had a fair result (an obese patient) and the other had a good result. Two patients developed deep infections; one ended in gangrene and amputation in a diabetic patient, and the other was a patient with fibular nonunion that eventually healed. Three patients had superficial infections that were treated successfully. Of the 32 cases, 23 (72%) showed good results, 4 (13%) showed fair results, and 5 (16%) showed poor results. The cases with poor results included three fibular nonunions, one deep infection, and one recurrent superficial infection and wound dehiscence after hardware removal. A syndesmotic screw is usually needed in cases of fracture-dislocations. Two patients with occult fibular nonunions developed diastasis of the syndesmosis after removal of the syndesmotic screw. It was found that reduction and temporary pinning of the distal tibiofibular joint helps achieve fibular length, which is crucial to restoring the biomechanics of the ankle joint. It seems advisable not to remove the syndesmotic screw until there are signs of healing of fibular fracture to avoid diastasis of the distal tibiofibular joint. Bone grafting should be considered in high energy fractures with comminution. These complex injuries are associated with higher rates of complications. Poor results can be attributed to fracture factors, e.g., open fractures, infections; patient factors, e.g., obesity, lowered immunity as in diabetes, and noncompliance; and iatrogenic factors, e.g., early removal of syndesmotic screws.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9278748     DOI: 10.1177/107110079701800811

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Foot Ankle Int        ISSN: 1071-1007            Impact factor:   2.827


  18 in total

Review 1.  An update on the evaluation and treatment of syndesmotic injuries.

Authors:  S Rammelt; P Obruba
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2014-11-12       Impact factor: 3.693

2.  Three-dimensional volume rendering of tibiofibular joint space and quantitative analysis of change in volume due to tibiofibular syndesmosis diastases.

Authors:  F Taser; Q Shafiq; N A Ebraheim
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2006-03-15       Impact factor: 2.199

3.  Talocrural dislocation with associated weber type C fibular fracture in a collegiate football player: a case report.

Authors:  R Daniel Ricci; James Cerullo; Robert O Blanc; Patrick J McMahon; Anthony M Buoncritiani; David A Stone; Freddie H Fu
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2008 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.860

4.  Titanium cable isotonic annular fixation system for the treatment of distal tibiofibular syndesmosis injury.

Authors:  Zhaofeng Jia; Jiwu Cheng; Haiyan Zhong; Tinghui Xiao; Jinke Ren; Yimiao Lin; Wenjun Huang; Yujie Liang; Qisong Liu; Xiaoming Zhang
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2019-08-15       Impact factor: 4.060

5.  The predictive value of MRI in the syndesmotic instability of ankle fracture.

Authors:  Young Hwan Park; Min A Yoon; Won Seok Choi; Gi Won Choi; Suk Joo Hong; Hak Jun Kim
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 2.199

6.  Posterior malleolar stabilization of syndesmotic injuries is equivalent to screw fixation.

Authors:  Anna N Miller; Eben A Carroll; Robert J Parker; David L Helfet; Dean G Lorich
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-10-02       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Coverage of exposed bone and hardware of the medial malleolus with tibialis posterior artery perforator flap after ankle fracture surgery complications.

Authors:  Ozturk Mb; Tolga Aksan; Cengiz Ertekin; Mustafa Tezcan
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2019-12-26       Impact factor: 3.315

8.  Weber C ankle fractures with tibiofibular diastasis: syndesmosis-only fixation.

Authors:  Serkan Sipahioglu; Sinan Zehir; Erdem Isikan
Journal:  Acta Ortop Bras       Date:  2017 May-Jun       Impact factor: 0.513

9.  Increasing age and modifiable comorbidities are associated with short-term complications after open reduction and internal fixation of ankle fractures.

Authors:  Richard M Danilkowicz; Nathan L Grimm; Jaewhan Kim; Jeffrey A O'Donnell; Nicholas B Allen; Samuel B Adams
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2021-03-23

10.  Is fibular fracture displacement consistent with tibiotalar displacement?

Authors:  Michel P J van den Bekerom; C Niek van Dijk
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-07-07       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.