Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 4 of 4
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 3 | Pages 150 - 163
1 Mar 2021
Flett L Adamson J Barron E Brealey S Corbacho B Costa ML Gedney G Giotakis N Hewitt C Hugill-Jones J Hukins D Keding A McDaid C Mitchell A Northgraves M O'Carroll G Parker A Scantlebury A Stobbart L Torgerson D Turner E Welch C Sharma H

Aims. A pilon fracture is a severe ankle joint injury caused by high-energy trauma, typically affecting men of working age. Although relatively uncommon (5% to 7% of all tibial fractures), this injury causes among the worst functional and health outcomes of any skeletal injury, with a high risk of serious complications and long-term disability, and with devastating consequences on patients’ quality of life and financial prospects. Robust evidence to guide treatment is currently lacking. This study aims to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of two surgical interventions that are most commonly used to treat pilon fractures. Methods. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) of 334 adult patients diagnosed with a closed type C pilon fracture will be conducted. Internal locking plate fixation will be compared with external frame fixation. The primary outcome and endpoint will be the Disability Rating Index (a patient self-reported assessment of physical disability) at 12 months. This will also be measured at baseline, three, six, and 24 months after randomization. Secondary outcomes include the Olerud and Molander Ankle Score (OMAS), the five-level EuroQol five-dimenison score (EQ-5D-5L), complications (including bone healing), resource use, work impact, and patient treatment preference. The acceptability of the treatments and study design to patients and health care professionals will be explored through qualitative methods. Discussion. The two treatments being compared are the most commonly used for this injury, however there is uncertainty over which is most clinically and cost-effective. The Articular Pilon Fracture (ACTIVE) Trial is a sufficiently powered and rigorously designed study to inform clinical decisions for the treatment of adults with this injury. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(3):150–163


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 Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 80-B, Issue 2 | Pages 333 - 338
1 Mar 1998
Böstman OM

Between 1985 and 1994, 1223 patients with malleolar fractures of the ankle were treated by open reduction and internal fixation with absorbable pins and screws, of whom 74 (6.1%) had an obvious inflammatory foreign-body reaction to the implants. Of these 74, ten later developed moderate to severe osteoarthritis of the ankle despite no evidence of incongruity of the articular surface. The implants used in these patients were made from polyglycolide, polylactide or glycolidelactide copolymer. The joint damage seemed to be due to polymeric debris entering the articular cavity through an osteolytic extension of an implant track. The ten patients had a long clinical course which included a vigorous local foreign-body reaction, synovial irritation and subsequent degeneration. At a follow-up of three to nine years, ankle arthrodesis had been necessary in two patients and is being considered for another two. The incidence of these changes in the whole series was 0.8%, which is not high, but awareness of this possible late complication is essential


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.