Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 4 of 4
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 100-B, Issue 4 | Pages 468 - 474
1 Apr 2018
Kirzner N Zotov P Goldbloom D Curry H Bedi H

Aims. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the functional and radiological outcomes of bridge plating, screw fixation, and a combination of both methods for the treatment of Lisfranc fracture dislocations. Patients and Methods. A total of 108 patients were treated for a Lisfranc fracture dislocation over a period of nine years. Of these, 38 underwent transarticular screw fixation, 45 dorsal bridge plating, and 25 a combination technique. Injuries were assessed preoperatively according to the Myerson classification system. The outcome measures included the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, the validated Manchester Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) functional tool, and the radiological Wilppula classification of anatomical reduction. Results. Significantly better functional outcomes were seen in the bridge plate group. These patients had a mean AOFAS score of 82.5 points, compared with 71.0 for the screw group and 63.3 for the combination group (p < 0.001). Similarly, the mean Manchester Oxford Foot Questionnaire score was 25.6 points in the bridge plate group, 38.1 in the screw group, and 45.5 in the combination group (p < 0.001). Functional outcome was dependent on the quality of reduction (p < 0.001). A trend was noted which indicated that plate fixation is associated with a better anatomical reduction (p = 0.06). Myerson types A and C2 significantly predicted a poorer functional outcome, suggesting that total incongruity in either a homolateral or divergent pattern leads to worse outcomes. The greater the number of columns fixed the worse the outcome (p < 0.001). Conclusion. Patients treated with dorsal bridge plating have better functional and radiological outcomes than those treated with transarticular screws or a combination technique. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:468–74


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 12 | Pages 1431 - 1442
1 Dec 2024
Poutoglidou F van Groningen B McMenemy L Elliot R Marsland D

Lisfranc injuries were previously described as fracture-dislocations of the tarsometatarsal joints. With advancements in modern imaging, subtle Lisfranc injuries are now more frequently recognized, revealing that their true incidence is much higher than previously thought. Injury patterns can vary widely in severity and anatomy. Early diagnosis and treatment are essential to achieve good outcomes. The original classification systems were anatomy-based, and limited as tools for guiding treatment. The current review, using the best available evidence, instead introduces a stability-based classification system, with weightbearing radiographs and CT serving as key diagnostic tools. Stable injuries generally have good outcomes with nonoperative management, most reliably treated with immobilization and non-weightbearing for six weeks. Displaced or comminuted injuries require surgical intervention, with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) being the most common approach, with a consensus towards bridge plating. While ORIF generally achieves satisfactory results, its effectiveness can vary, particularly in high-energy injuries. Primary arthrodesis remains niche for the treatment of acute injuries, but may offer benefits such as lower rates of post-traumatic arthritis and hardware removal. Novel fixation techniques, including suture button fixation, aim to provide flexible stabilization, which theoretically could improve midfoot biomechanics and reduce complications. Early findings suggest promising functional outcomes, but further studies are required to validate this method compared with established techniques. Future research should focus on refining stability-based classification systems, validation of weightbearing CT, improving rehabilitation protocols, and optimizing surgical techniques for various injury patterns to ultimately enhance patient outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(12):1431–1442


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 100-B, Issue 2 | Pages 176 - 182
1 Feb 2018
Petrie MJ Blakey CM Chadwick C Davies HG Blundell CM Davies MB

Aims

Fractures of the navicular can occur in isolation but, owing to the intimate anatomical and biomechanical relationships, are often associated with other injuries to the neighbouring bones and joints in the foot. As a result, they can lead to long-term morbidity and poor function. Our aim in this study was to identify patterns of injury in a new classification system of traumatic fractures of the navicular, with consideration being given to the commonly associated injuries to the midfoot.

Patients and Methods

We undertook a retrospective review of 285 consecutive patients presenting over an eight- year period with a fracture of the navicular. Five common patterns of injury were identified and classified according to the radiological features. Type 1 fractures are dorsal avulsion injuries related to the capsule of the talonavicular joint. Type 2 fractures are isolated avulsion injuries to the tuberosity of the navicular. Type 3 fractures are a variant of tarsometatarsal fracture/dislocations creating instability of the medial ray. Type 4 fractures involve the body of the navicular with no associated injury to the lateral column and type 5 fractures occur in conjunction with disruption of the midtarsal joint with crushing of the medial or lateral, or both, columns of the foot.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 101-B, Issue 4 | Pages 447 - 453
1 Apr 2019
Sanders FRK Backes M Dingemans SA Hoogendoorn JM Schep NWL Vermeulen J Goslings JC Schepers T

Aims

The aim of this study was to evaluate the functional outcome in patients undergoing implant removal (IR) after fracture fixation below the level of the knee.

Patients and Methods

All adult patients (18 to 75 years) undergoing IR after fracture fixation below the level of the knee between November 2014 and September 2016 were included as part of the WIFI (Wound Infections Following Implant Removal Below the Knee) trial, performed in 17 teaching hospitals and two university hospitals in The Netherlands. In this multicentre prospective cohort, the primary outcome was the difference in functional status before and after IR, measured by the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS), with a minimal clinically important difference of nine points.