Aims

This retrospective cohort study compared the results of vascularised and non-vascularised anterior sliding tibial grafts for the treatment of osteoarthritis (OA)of the ankle secondary to osteonecrosis of the talus.

A new method of vascularised tibial grafting has been developed for the treatment of avascular necrosis (AVN) of the talus and secondary osteoarthritis (OA) of the ankle. We used 40 cadavers to identify the vascular anatomy of the distal tibia in order to establish how to elevate a vascularised tibial graft safely. Between 2008 and 2012, eight patients (three male, five female, mean age 50 years; 26 to 68) with isolated AVN of the talus and 12 patients (four male, eight female, mean age 58 years; 23 to 76) with secondary OA underwent vascularised bone grafting from the distal tibia either to revascularise the talus or for arthrodesis. The radiological and clinical outcomes were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 31 months (24 to 62). The peri-malleolar arterial arch was confirmed in the cadaveric study. A vascularised bone graft could be elevated safely using the peri-malleolar pedicle. The clinical outcomes for the group with AVN of the talus assessed with the mean Mazur ankle grading scores, improved significantly from 39 points (21 to 48) pre-operatively to 81 points (73 to 90) at the final follow-up (p = 0.01). In all eight revascularisations, bone healing was obtained without progression to talar collapse, and union was established in 11 of 12 vascularised arthrodeses at a mean follow-up of 34 months (24 to 58). MRI showed revascularisation of the talus in all patients. . We conclude that a vascularised tibial graft can be used both for revascularisation of the talus and for the arthrodesis of the ankle in patients with OA secondary to AVN of the talus. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:802–8

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.