Value of Intraoperative 3D Imaging on the Quality of Reduction of the Distal Tibiofibular Joint When Using a Suture-Button System.
intraoperative 3D imaging
reduction
suture-button system
syndesmosis
Journal
Foot & ankle international
ISSN: 1944-7876
Titre abrégé: Foot Ankle Int
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9433869
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2023
01 2023
Historique:
pubmed:
21
12
2022
medline:
11
1
2023
entrez:
20
12
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The quality of reduction of the distal tibiofibular joint (DTFJ) has a major impact on the outcome. Novel suture-button systems as well as intraoperative 3D imaging can be applied to increase the quality of DTFJ reduction intraoperatively. The individual effect of either remains unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the value of intraoperative 3D imaging on the quality of reduction of the DTFJ when using a suture-button system. Retrospective, radiographic study including adult patients who underwent surgical stabilization of the syndesmosis with a suture-button system for acute, unilateral, unstable syndesmotic injuries with postoperative bilateral CT imaging. The use of an intraoperative 3D scan was the individual surgeon's choice. Assessed was whether the intraoperative 3D imaging had an influence on the postoperative quality of DTFJ reduction and revision rates. These findings were put in perspective to the correction potential of the suture-button system. A total of 147 patients were included; 76 of these received an intraoperative 3D imaging. Neither the rate of formal malreduction (17% vs 17%) nor the postoperative revision rate (4% vs 3%) differed significantly between patients with or without intraoperative 3D imaging. Intraoperative 3D imaging revealed a false-negative rate of 14%. The intrinsic correction potential of the suture-button system reduced the number of formally malreduced DTFJs in both groups by 51%. The additional value of intraoperative 3D imaging to assess the quality of DTFJ reduction in our series did not improve syndesmotic reduction when using a flexible suture-button system. Level III, retrospective comparative cohort study.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The quality of reduction of the distal tibiofibular joint (DTFJ) has a major impact on the outcome. Novel suture-button systems as well as intraoperative 3D imaging can be applied to increase the quality of DTFJ reduction intraoperatively. The individual effect of either remains unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the value of intraoperative 3D imaging on the quality of reduction of the DTFJ when using a suture-button system.
METHODS
Retrospective, radiographic study including adult patients who underwent surgical stabilization of the syndesmosis with a suture-button system for acute, unilateral, unstable syndesmotic injuries with postoperative bilateral CT imaging. The use of an intraoperative 3D scan was the individual surgeon's choice. Assessed was whether the intraoperative 3D imaging had an influence on the postoperative quality of DTFJ reduction and revision rates. These findings were put in perspective to the correction potential of the suture-button system.
RESULTS
A total of 147 patients were included; 76 of these received an intraoperative 3D imaging. Neither the rate of formal malreduction (17% vs 17%) nor the postoperative revision rate (4% vs 3%) differed significantly between patients with or without intraoperative 3D imaging. Intraoperative 3D imaging revealed a false-negative rate of 14%. The intrinsic correction potential of the suture-button system reduced the number of formally malreduced DTFJs in both groups by 51%.
CONCLUSION
The additional value of intraoperative 3D imaging to assess the quality of DTFJ reduction in our series did not improve syndesmotic reduction when using a flexible suture-button system.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level III, retrospective comparative cohort study.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36537750
doi: 10.1177/10711007221138775
pmc: PMC9834319
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Comment
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
54-61Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentOn
Type : CommentIn
Références
J Foot Ankle Surg. 2007 Nov-Dec;46(6):456-63
pubmed: 17980843
Foot Ankle Surg. 2017 Mar;23(1):53-56
pubmed: 28159044
Foot Ankle Int. 2021 Feb;42(2):132-136
pubmed: 32945190
Foot Ankle Int. 1994 Aug;15(8):407-14
pubmed: 7981810
J Orthop Trauma. 2005 Feb;19(2):102-8
pubmed: 15677926
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Oct 16;95(20):1838-43
pubmed: 24132357
J Orthop Trauma. 2019 Nov;33(11):531-537
pubmed: 31633643
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1976 Apr;58(3):356-7
pubmed: 1262367
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018 Jan 3;100(1):2-12
pubmed: 29298255
Am J Sports Med. 2019 Sep;47(11):2764-2771
pubmed: 30475639
Orthop Clin North Am. 2019 Jul;50(3):401-414
pubmed: 31084843
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012 Aug 1;94(15):1386-90
pubmed: 22854991
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018 Oct;26(10):3156-3164
pubmed: 29224059
J Anat. 2010 Dec;217(6):633-45
pubmed: 21108526
Bone Joint J. 2021 Jan;103-B(1):178-183
pubmed: 33380196
Injury. 2015;46(6):1119-26
pubmed: 25769201
Acta Orthop Scand. 1998 Feb;69(1):43-7
pubmed: 9524517
Foot Ankle Int. 2022 Nov;43(11):1393-1401
pubmed: 35942915
Acta Orthop Scand Suppl. 1981;189:1-131
pubmed: 6787831
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021 Jan 26;22(1):116
pubmed: 33499849
J Foot Ankle Surg. 2019 Sep;58(5):946-953
pubmed: 31474406
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002 Jan;84(1):26-31
pubmed: 11792776
Bone Joint J. 2020 Feb;102-B(2):212-219
pubmed: 32009435
Injury. 2021 Oct;52(10):3143-3149
pubmed: 34246483