Dorsiflexion is more feasible than plantar flexion in ultrasound evaluation of the calcaneofibular ligament: a combination study of ultrasound and cadaver.
Anatomy
Calcaneofibular ligament
Ultrasound
Journal
Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA
ISSN: 1433-7347
Titre abrégé: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9314730
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2020
Jan 2020
Historique:
received:
08
01
2019
accepted:
15
07
2019
pubmed:
22
7
2019
medline:
29
5
2020
entrez:
22
7
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Ultrasound (US) is a valuable tool for the evaluation of chronic lateral instability of the ankle; however, the feasibility of US for calcaneofibular ligament (CFL) assessment remains unknown. This study aimed to depict and compare CFL on US in various ankle positions to determine the optimal method for evaluating CFL with US and to interpret US findings using cadaveric specimens. The US study included 43 ankles of 25 healthy individuals. The CFL was scanned with US in 20° plantar flexion, neutral position, 20° dorsiflexion and maximum dorsiflexion. The distances between fibula and CFL were compared. The cadaveric study included macroscopic qualitative observation of the dynamic change of CFL in 7 ankles and quantitative observation of the directions of CFL and footprints in 17 ankles. In the US study, the mean distance (mm) between fibula and CFL was 7.3 ± 1.3 in 20° plantar flexion, 6.7 ± 1.6 in neutral position, 4.3 ± 2.5 in 20° dorsiflexion and 3.1 ± 2.1 in maximum dorsiflexion. The more dorsiflexed the ankle was, the shorter the distance between fibula and CFL was (Jonckheere's trend test p < 0.001). In the cadaveric study, the CFL fibres were aligned parallel between the mid-substance and the fibular attachment in maximum dorsiflexion, whilst CFL was reflected and rotated in plantar flexion. The whole length of the CFL, including its fibular attachment, is more likely to be visualized with US in dorsiflexion than in plantar flexion due to the direction of the CFL at the fibular attachment, which is parallel with the mid-substance in maximum dorsiflexion. IV.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31327035
doi: 10.1007/s00167-019-05630-z
pii: 10.1007/s00167-019-05630-z
doi:
Types de publication
Clinical Trial
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
262-269Références
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014 Jul;22(7):1701-7
pubmed: 24067992
Br J Radiol. 2014 Jan;87(1033):20130406
pubmed: 24352708
Am J Sports Med. 2010 Apr;38(4):782-90
pubmed: 20139326
Foot Ankle Int. 2013 Apr;34(4):582-6
pubmed: 23559616
Clin J Sport Med. 1999 Jan;9(1):40-5
pubmed: 10336051
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016 May 18;98(10):842-8
pubmed: 27194494
J Clin Ultrasound. 2004 Nov-Dec;32(9):491-9
pubmed: 15558626
Open Orthop J. 2017 Jul 31;11:610-616
pubmed: 28979580
Clin Radiol. 2015 Apr;70(4):416-23
pubmed: 25573813
Clin Radiol. 2012 Apr;67(4):313-8
pubmed: 22078461
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017 Jun;25(6):1892-1902
pubmed: 27295109
J Orthop Surg Res. 2018 May 22;13(1):122
pubmed: 29788978
Insights Imaging. 2010 Jul;1(3):99-141
pubmed: 23100193
Skeletal Radiol. 2010 Jan;39(1):41-7
pubmed: 19685050
J Ultrasound. 2013 Aug 03;17(2):79-87
pubmed: 24883130
Urology. 2015 Mar;85(3):499-504
pubmed: 25582818
J Foot Ankle Res. 2017 Dec 28;10:60
pubmed: 29299066
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016 Apr;24(4):944-56
pubmed: 27052302
J Orthop Sci. 2009 Nov;14(6):699-703
pubmed: 19997815
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009 Feb;192(2):487-95
pubmed: 19155415
Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2016 Apr;11(2):164-74
pubmed: 27104050
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014 Jun 18;96(12):e98
pubmed: 24951749
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2015 Oct;51(5):647-53
pubmed: 26351106
J Ultrasound Med. 1996 Apr;15(4):277-84
pubmed: 8683661