The primary aim of this study was to present the mid-term follow-up of a multicentre randomized controlled trial (RCT) which compared the functional outcome following routine removal (RR) to the outcome following on-demand removal (ODR) of the syndesmotic screw (SS). All patients included in the ‘ROutine vs on DEmand removal Of the syndesmotic screw’ (RODEO) trial received the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS), American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Hindfoot Score (AOFAS), Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS), and EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D). Out of the 152 patients, 109 (71.7%) completed the mid-term follow-up questionnaire and were included in this study (53 treated with RR and 56 with ODR). Median follow-up was 50 months (interquartile range 43.0 to 56.0) since the initial surgical treatment of the acute syndesmotic injury. The primary outcome of this study consisted of the OMAS scores of the two groups.Aims
Methods
The quest for optimal treatment of acute distal tibiofibular syndesmotic disruptions is still in progress. Using suture-button repair devices is one of the dynamic stabilization options, however, they may not be always appropriate for stabilization of length-unstable syndesmotic injuries. Recently, a novel screw-suture repair system was developed to address such issues. The aim of this study was to investigate the performance of the novel screw-suture repair system in comparison to a suture-button stabilization of unstable syndesmotic injuries. Eight pairs of human cadaveric lower legs were CT scanned under 700 N single-leg axial loading in five foot positions – neutral, 15° external/internal rotation and 20° dorsi-/plantarflexion – in 3 different states: (1) pre-injured (intact); (2) injured, characterized by complete syndesmosis and deltoid ligaments cuts simulating pronation-eversion injury types III and IV as well as supination-eversion injury type IV according to Lauge-Hansen; (3) reconstructed, using a screw-suture (FIBULINK, Group 1) or a suture-button (TightRope, Group 2) implants for syndesmotic stabilization, placed 20 mm proximal to the tibia plafond. Following, all specimens were: (1) biomechanically tested over 5000 cycles under combined 1400 N axial and ±15° torsional loading; (2) rescanned. Clear space (diastasis), anterior tibiofibular distance, talar dome angle and fibular shortening were measured radiologically from CT scans. Anteroposterior (AP), axial, mediolateral and torsional movements at the distal tibiofibular joint level were evaluated biomechanically via motion tracking. In each group clear space increased significantly after injury (p ≤ 0.004) and became significantly smaller in reconstructed compared with both pre-injured and injured states (p ≤ 0.041). In addition, after reconstruction it was significantly smaller in Group 1 compared to Group 2 (p < 0.001). AP and axial movements were significantly smaller in Group 1 compared with Group 2 (p < 0.001). No further significant differences were identified/detected between the groups (p ≥ 0.113). Although both implant systems demonstrate ability for stabilization of unstable syndesmotic injuries, the screw-suture reconstruction provides better anteroposterior translation and axial stability of the tibiofibular joint and maintains it over time under dynamic loading. Therefore, it could be considered as a valid option for treatment of syndesmotic disruptions.
The quest for optimal treatment of acute distal tibiofibular syndesmotic disruptions is still in full progress. Using suture-button repair devices is one of the dynamic stabilization options, however, they may not be always appropriate for stabilization of length-unstable syndesmotic injuries. Recently, a novel screw-suture repair system was developed to address such issues. The aim of this study was to investigate the performance of the novel screw-suture repair system in comparison to a suture-button stabilization of unstable syndesmotic injuries. Eight pairs of human cadaveric lower legs were CT scanned under 700 N single-leg axial loading in five foot positions – neutral, 15° external/internal rotation and 20° dorsi-/plantarflexion – in 3 different states: (1) pre-injured (intact); (2) injured, characterized by complete syndesmosis and deltoid ligaments cuts simulating pronation-eversion injury types III and IV, and supination-eversion injury type IV according to Lauge-Hansen; (3) reconstructed, using a screw-suture (FIBULINK, Group 1) or a suture-button (TightRope, Group 2) implants for syndesmotic stabilization, placed 20 mm proximal to the tibia plafond/joint surface. Following, all specimens were: (1) biomechanically tested over 5000 cycles under combined 1400 N axial and ±15° torsional loading; (2) rescanned. Clear space (diastasis), anterior tibiofibular distance, talar dome angle and fibular shortening were measured radiologically from CT scans. Anteroposterior, axial, mediolateral and torsional movements at the distal tibiofibular joint level were evaluated biomechanically via motion tracking. In each group clear space increased significantly after injury (p ≤ 0.004) and became significantly smaller in reconstructed compared with both pre-injured and injured states (p ≤ 0.041). In addition, after reconstruction it was significantly smaller in Group 1 compared to Group 2 (p < 0.001). Anteroposterior and axial movements were significantly smaller in Group 1 compared with Group 2 (p < 0.001). No further significant differences were detected between the groups (p ≥ 0.113). Conclusions Although both implant systems demonstrate ability for stabilization of unstable syndesmotic injuries, the screw-suture reconstruction provides better anteroposterior translation and axial stability of the tibiofibular joint and maintains it over time under dynamic loading. Therefore, it could be considered as a valid option for treatment of syndesmotic disruptions.
The aim of this study was to investigate whether on-demand removal (ODR) is noninferior to routine removal (RR) of syndesmotic screws regarding functional outcome. Adult patients (aged above 17 years) with traumatic syndesmotic injury, surgically treated within 14 days of trauma using one or two syndesmotic screws, were eligible (n = 490) for inclusion in this randomized controlled noninferiority trial. A total of 197 patients were randomized for either ODR (retaining the syndesmotic screw unless there were complaints warranting removal) or RR (screw removed at eight to 12 weeks after syndesmotic fixation), of whom 152 completed the study. The primary outcome was functional outcome at 12 months after screw placement, measured by the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS).Aims
Methods
Since surgical site infections (SSIs) remain among the most common complications of orthopedic (trauma) surgery, there has been unwavering attention for potential predictors of a SSI. Specifically in surgical fields with a high complication rate, such as foot/ankle surgery, risk factor identification is of great importance. Recently, some studies have suggested environmental factors such as season to be of influence on the number of SSI. Specifically patients operated on in the summer are reported to have a higher incidence of SSIs, compared to other seasons. The aim of this study is to identify if “seasonality” is a significant predictor for SSI in a cohort of (trauma) surgical foot and ankle procedures. This retrospective cohort study included all patients undergoing trauma related surgery (fracture fixation, arthrodesis, implant removal and tendon repair) of the lower leg, ankle and foot. Procedures were performed at a single Level 1 Trauma Center in the Netherlands between September 2015 until February 2019. Potential risk factors/ confounders for SSI were identified using univariate analysis (Chi-Square/Mann-Whitney U). Procedures were divided in two groups: 1) performed in summer (June, July or August), 2) not performed in summer (September-May). The number of SSIs was compared between the 2 groups, correcting for confounders, using multivariate regression.Aim
Method
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. 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.Aims
Patients and Methods
Following clean (class I, not contaminated) surgical procedures, the rate of surgical site infection (SSI) should be less than approximately 2%. However, an infection rate of 12.2% has been reported following removal of orthopedic implants used for treatment of fractures below the knee. The objective of this trial was to evaluate the effect of a single dose of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis on the incidence of SSIs following removal of orthopedic implants used for treatment of fractures below the knee. This multicenter, double-blind, randomized clinical trial included 500 patients from 19 hospitals with a follow-up of 6 months. Eligible were patients aged 18 to 75 years with previous surgical treatment for fractures below the knee who were undergoing removal of orthopedic implants. Exclusion criteria were an active infection or fistula, antibiotic treatment, reimplantation of osteosynthesis material in the same session, allergy for cephalosporins, known kidney disease, immunosuppressant use, or pregnancy. The intervention was a single preoperative intravenous dose of 1000 mg of cefazolin (cefazolin group, n = 228) or sodium chloride (0.9%; saline group, n = 242). Primary outcome was SSI within 30 days as measured by the criteria from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Secondary outcome measures were functional outcome, health-related quality of life, and patient satisfaction.Aim
Method
In approximately 20% of patients with ankle fractures, there
is an concomitant injury to the syndesmosis which requires stabilisation,
usually with one or more syndesmotic screws. The aim of this review
is to evaluate whether removal of the syndesmotic screw is required
in order for the patient to obtain optimal functional recovery. A literature search was conducted in Medline, Embase and the
Cochrane Library for articles in which the syndesmotic screw was
retained. Articles describing both removal and retaining of syndesmotic
screws were included. Excluded were biomechanical studies, studies
not providing patient related outcome measures, case reports, studies
on skeletally immature patients and reviews. No restrictions regarding
year of publication and language were applied.Aims
Materials and Methods
