Suspensory Device Fixation of Lisfranc Injuries in a Southeast Asian Urban Population: Patient-Reported Functional Outcomes.
foot
lisfranc
orthopaedic
sport injury
suspensory fixation
suture button
trauma
Journal
Cureus
ISSN: 2168-8184
Titre abrégé: Cureus
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101596737
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2023
Oct 2023
Historique:
accepted:
07
10
2023
medline:
8
11
2023
pubmed:
8
11
2023
entrez:
8
11
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Introduction Open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) and primary arthrodesis are two conventional options for the treatment of Lisfranc injuries. However, they are associated with implant-related complications. An alternative suspensory device construct using interosseous nonabsorbable sutures with endobuttons has been described with satisfactory results. This study aims to explore functional outcomes after suture button fixation of Lisfranc injuries in a Southeast Asian population. Methods This was a single-surgeon retrospective study of patients with Lisfranc injuries treated surgically using a suture button fixation technique between 2017 and 2019. Data collected included demographic information, pre-injury levels of activity, nature of injury, and type of surgery performed. The minimum postoperative follow-up was one year. The Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) and Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) were used to evaluate patient-reported outcomes. Scores were reported in percentage (%) with median and interquartile range. Results Twenty-nine patients with a mean age of 29 years (21-76) were recruited. Sixteen underwent suture button fixation only (SB), and 13 underwent suture button fixation with intercuneiform screw fixation and plating (SBM). The median scores for the FAOS and FAAM questionnaires were at least 80% in all domains. Twenty-eight patients (97%) were able to return to pre-injury activity level, 27 patients (93%) were able to return to sports. Only one patient was not satisfied with the outcomes of surgery. No patients had post-traumatic arthritis or hardware failure necessitating implant removal at the final follow-up. Conclusion This study has demonstrated that treatment of Lisfranc injuries with a suspensory device construct resulted in good outcomes with 97% of patients being able to return to pre-injury activity levels, and 93% of patients being able to return to sports. It may not be necessary to perform primary arthrodesis in uncomplicated Lisfranc injuries. This technique is also advantageous as implant removal is not routinely required due to the design and biomechanical properties of suspensory devices.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37937016
doi: 10.7759/cureus.46629
pmc: PMC10626215
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e46629Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023, Tan et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Foot Ankle Int. 2017 Sep;38(9):957-963
pubmed: 28602113
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000 Nov;82(11):1609-18
pubmed: 11097452
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016 Jun;474(6):1445-52
pubmed: 26022112
Foot Ankle Surg. 2020 Jul;26(5):535-540
pubmed: 31257042
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2007 May;15(5):671-5
pubmed: 16858562
Instr Course Lect. 2009;58:583-94
pubmed: 19385569
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 Mar;88(3):514-20
pubmed: 16510816
Injury. 2019 Feb;50(2):571-578
pubmed: 30587333
J Orthop. 2019 Jun 18;17:7-12
pubmed: 31879465
J Orthop Trauma. 2001 Feb;15(2):107-10
pubmed: 11232648
J Foot Ankle Surg. 2008 May-Jun;47(3):250-8
pubmed: 18455673
Cureus. 2017 Feb 7;9(2):e1015
pubmed: 28344910
Foot Ankle Int. 2016 Dec;37(12):1374-1380
pubmed: 27899721
Injury. 2007 Jul;38(7):856-60
pubmed: 17214988
Foot Ankle Int. 2006 Aug;27(8):653-60
pubmed: 16919225
Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2006 Apr;23(2):303-22, vi
pubmed: 16903155
Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2008 Feb;16(1):19-27, v
pubmed: 18440475
Foot Ankle Int. 2005 Jun;26(6):462-73
pubmed: 15960913
Int Orthop. 2010 Dec;34(8):1083-91
pubmed: 20683593
Bone Joint J. 2018 Apr 1;100-B(4):468-474
pubmed: 29629578
Foot Ankle Int. 2009 Oct;30(10):913-22
pubmed: 19796583