Abstract
Purpose
The treatment of the posterior fragment in trimalleolar fractures differs from hospital to hospital in the Netherlands. A nationwide survey was performed to evaluate the fixation criteria and practice variation.
Methods
An online cross-sectional survey amongst (orthopaedic) trauma surgeons was performed in the Netherlands. It consisted of three sections: a general section, a section showing preoperative images of six cases and a section with postoperative images of nine cases.
Results
A total of 151 surgeons completed the online survey. 45% of the respondents indicated that they fixated the posterior fragment if smaller than 25% of the intra-articular surface. 48% preferred an open posterior approach to fixate the posterior fragment. There was good consensus in treatment for the two cases with Bartonicek type 4 fractures (operative treatment in 73 and 72% respectively). Little consensus was found for Bartonicek type 2 and 3 fractures (88% opted for operative treatment in one case, but 89% for conservative treatment in the second case). Reoperation was mostly considered in cases with a step-off of more than 1 mm (by 33–38% of the respondents). There was great variation in the choice of treatment if only the size of the posterior fragment was considered. Other fixation criteria such as postoperative step-off or instability after fixation of the lateral and medial malleoli are taken into account. In cases where fixation was needed, a percutaneous approach and an open posterolateral approach were equally preferred.
Conclusions
There is much variation in treatment of the posterior malleolar fracture amongst orthopaedic and trauma surgeons in the Netherlands. The percutaneous approach and open posterolateral approach to fixate the posterior malleolar fracture seem to be equally used in the Netherlands. Still, there is no uniformity in treatment of posterior malleolar fracture, especially for Bartonicek 2 and Bartonicek 3 fractures. Reoperation is considered by less than half of the surgeons in case of postoperative persistent step-off of more than 1 mm.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Drijfhout van Hooff CC, Verhage SM, Hoogendoorn JM. Influence of fragment size and postoperative joint congruency on long-term outcome of posterior malleolar fractures. Foot Ankle Int. 2015;36(6):673–8.
Xu HL, Li X, Zhang DY, et al. A retrospective study of posterior malleolus fractures. Int Orthop. 2012;36(9):1929–36.
Haraguchi N, Haruyama H, Toga H, Kato F. Pathoanatomy of posterior malleolar fractures of the ankle. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(5):1085–92.
Mason LW, Marlow WJ, Widnall J, Molloy AP. Pathoanatomy and associated injuries of posterior malleolus fracture of the ankle. Foot Ankle Int. 2017;38(11):1229–35.
Bartonicek J, Rammelt S, Kostlivy K, Vanecek V, Klika D, Tresi I. Anatomy and classification of the posterior tibial fragment in ankle fractures. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2015;135(4):505–16.
Bartonicek J, Rammelt S, Tucek M. Posterior malleolar fractures: changing concepts and recent developments. Foot Ankle Clin. 2017;22(1):125–45.
Solan MC, Sakkelariou A. Posterior malleolus fractures: worth fixing. Bone Joint J. 2017;99 B(11):1413–9.
Heim D, Niederhauser K, Simbrey N. The volkmann dogma: a retrospective, long-term, single-center study. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2010;36(6):515–9.
Rammelt S, Bartonicek J. Posterior malleolar fractures: a critical analysis review. JBJS Rev. 2020;8(8):e1900207.
Verhage SM, Boot F, Schipper IB, et al. Open reduction and internal fixation of posterior malleolar fractures using the posterolateral approach. Bone Joint J. 2016;98 B(6):812–7.
Ferries JS, DeCoster TA, Firoozbakhsh KK, Garcia JF, Miller RA. Plain radiographic interpretation in trimalleolar ankle fractures poorly assesses posterior fragment size. J Orthop Trauma. 1994;8(4):328–31.
Verhage SM, Rhemrev SJ, Keizer SB, Quarles van Ufford HM, Hoogendoorn JM. Interobserver variation in classification of malleolar fractures. Skeletal Radiol. 2015;44(10):1435–9.
Mangnus L, Meijer DT, Stufkens SA, Mellema JJ, Steller EP, Kerkhoffs GM, Doornberg JN. Posterior malleolar fracture patterns. J Orthop Trauma. 2015;29(9):428–35.
Meijer DT, Doornberg JN, Sierevelt IN, Mallee WH, van Dijk CN, Kerkhoffs GM, Stufkens SA. Ankle platform study collaborative – science of variation group .Guesstimation of posterior malleolar fractures on lateral plain radiographs. Injury. 2015;46(10):2024–9.
Meijer DT, de Muinck Keizer RJ, Doornberg JN, et al. Ankle platform study collaborative—science of variation group. Diagnostic accuracy of 2-dimensional computed tomography for articular involvement and fracture pattern of posterior malleolar fractures. Foot Ankle Int. 2016;37(1):75–82.
Bartonicek J, Rammelt S, Tucek M, Nanka O. Posterior malleolar fractures of the ankle. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2015;41(6):587–600.
Langenhuijsen JF, Heetveld MJ, Ultee JM, et al. Results of ankle fractures with involvement of the posterior tibial margin. J Trauma. 2002;53(1):55–60.
De Vries JS, Wijgman AJ, Sierevelt IN, et al. Long-term results of ankle fractures with a posterior malleolar fragment. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2005;44(3):211–7.
Jaskulka RA, Ittner G, Schedl R. Fractures of the posterior tibial margin: their role in the prognosis of malleolar fractures. J Trauma. 1989;29(11):1565–70.
McDaniel WJ, Wilson FC. Trimalleolar fractures of the ankle. An end result study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1977;122:37–45.
Broos PL, Bisschop AP. Operative treatment of ankle fractures in adults: correlation between types of fracture and final results. Injury. 1991;22(5):403–6.
Tucek M, Rammelt S, Kostlivy K, Bartonicek J. CT controlled results of direct reduction and fixation of posterior malleolus in ankle fractures. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2021;47(4):913–20.
Hoogendoorn JM. Posterior malleolar open reduction and internal fixation through a posterolateral approach for trimalleolar fractures. JBJS Essent Surg Tech. 2017;7(4): e31.
Funding
No source of funding is reported.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
No conflict of interest is reported for all authors.
Ethical approval
The medical ethical committee of South-West Netherlands approved this study. This study was performed in accordance with the current ethical standards.
Informed consent
No informed consent was needed according to the medical ethical committee.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Verhage, S.M., Hoogendoorn, J.M., Krijnen, P. et al. Variation in posterior fragment fixation in the Netherlands: a nationwide study. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg 49, 317–326 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-022-02066-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-022-02066-y