Advertisement

Anterior inferior tibiofibular ligament exploration and repair in Weber B-type ankle fracture: a comparative retrospective study

  • Harri J. PakarinenEmail author
  • Tapio E. Flinkkilä
  • Pasi P. Ohtonen
  • Jukka Y. Ristiniemi
Original Article
  • 214 Downloads

Abstract

Background

This study was designed to evaluate the outcome with and without repair of the AITFL by comparing two similar groups of patients with Weber B-type (Lauge–Hansen SE) fractures who were treated with similar operative methods except that the AITFL was not explored or either repaired in one group.

Materials and methods

A total of 288 patients with Lauge–Hansen SE4 ankle fractures were eligible for this study. In group 1 (n = 165), the AITFL was explored and the ruptured ligament sutured or the avulsion fracture fixed at the original insertion. In group 2 (n = 123), a similar operative method was used, but the AITFL was not explored. The postoperative medial tibiotalar clear space (TTCS) and congruence of the tibiotalar joint were measured and analyzed. The clinical outcome was measured using the Olerud–Molander (OM) scoring system with a minimum follow-up of 2 years for both groups.

Results

No significant difference was found between these two treatment protocols using the postoperative TTCS, talar tilt, or OM functional score.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that exploration of the AITFL may not be needed in Weber B-type ankle fractures.

Keywords

Ankle fracture AITFL Weber B Supination-external rotation Syndesmosis 

Notes

Conflict of interest

No funds were received in support of this study. The author(s) of this manuscript has/have chosen not to furnish Ejost, and its readers with information regarding any relationship that might exist between a commercial party and material contained in this manuscript that might represent a potential conflict of interest. No benefits in any form have been or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
    Ali MS, McLaren CA, Rouholamin E, O’Connor BT (1987) Ankle fractures in the elderly: nonoperative or operative treatment. J Orthop Trauma 1(4):275–280PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Babis GC, Papagelopoulos PJ, Tsarouchas J, Zoubos AB, Korres DS et al (2000) Operative treatment for Maisonneuve fracture of the proximal fibula. Orthopedics 23(7):687–690PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Beumer A, van Hemert WL, Niesing R et al (2004) Radiographic measurement of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis has limited use. Clin Orthop Relat Res 423:227–234PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boden SD, Labropoulos PA, McCowin P et al (1989) Mechanical considerations for the syndesmosis screw. A cadaver study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 71(10):1548–1555Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cedell CA (1967) Supination-outward rotation injuries of the ankle. A clinical and roentgenological study with special reference to the operative treatment. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 110:3Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ebraheim NA, Lu J, Yang H et al (1997) Radiographic and CT evaluation of tibiofibular syndesmotic diastasis: a cadaver study. Foot Ankle Int 18(11):693–698PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gardner MJ, Demetrakopoulos D, Briggs SM et al (2006) The ability of the Lauge-Hansen classification to predict ligament injury and mechanism in ankle fractures: an MRI study. J Orthop Trauma 20(4):267–272PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gardner MJ, Demetrakopoulos D, Briggs SM, Helfet DL, Lorich DG (2006) Malreduction of the tibiofibular syndesmosis in ankle fractures. Foot Ankle Int 27(10):788–792PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Haraguchi N, Armiger RS (2009) A new interpretation of the mechanism of ankle fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91(4):821–829PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jenkinson RJ, Sanders DW, Macleod MD et al (2005) Intraoperative diagnosis of syndesmosis injuries in external rotation ankle fractures. J Orthop Trauma 19(9):604–609PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kabukcuoglu Y, Kucukkaya M, Eren T et al (2000) The ANK device: a new approach in the treatment of the fractures of the lateral malleolus associated with the rupture of the syndesmosis. Foot Ankle Int 21(9):753–758PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lauge-Hansen N (1959) Fractures of the ankle. II. Combined experimental-surgical and experimental-roentgenologic investigations. Arch Surg 60(5):957–985Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Michelson JD (1995) Fractures about the ankle. J Bone Joint Surg Am 77(1):142–152PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Michelson J, Solocoff D, Waldman B et al (1997) Ankle fractures. The Lauge-Hansen classification revisited. Clin Orthop Relat Res 345:198–205PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Michelson JD, Magid D, McHale K (2007) Clinical utility of a stability-based ankle fracture classification system. J Orthop Trauma 21(5):307–315PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Muller ME, Allgower M, Schneider R et al (1979) Manual of internal fixation. Techniques recommended by the AO Group, 2nd edn. Springer, New York, pp 282–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Muller ME, Allgower M, Schneider R, Willenegger H (1991) Manual of internal fixation. Techniques recommended by the AO group, 3rd edn. Springer, New York, pp 595–612Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nelson OA (2006) Examination and repair of the AITFL in transmalleolar fractures. J Orthop Trauma 20(9):637–643Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ogilvie-Harris DJ, Reed SC, Hedman TP (1994) Disruption of the ankle syndesmosis: biomechanical study of the ligamentous restraints. Arthroscopy 10:558–560PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Olerud C, Molander H (1984) A scoring scale for symptom evaluation after ankle fracture. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 103(3):190–194Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Phillips WA, Schwartz HS, Keller CS et al (1985) A prospective, randomized study of the management of severe ankle fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 67(1):67–78Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Purvis GD (1982) Displaced, unstable ankle fractures: classification, incidence, and management of a consecutive series. Clin Orthop Relat Res 165:91–98Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rasmussen O, Kromann-Andersen C, Boe S (1983) Deltoid ligament. Functional analysis of the medial collateral ligamentous apparatus of the ankle joint. Acta Orthop Scand 54(1):36–44Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sclafani SJ (1985) Ligamentous injury of the lower tibiofibular syndesmosis: radiographic evidence. Radiology 156:21–27PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Stark E, Tornetta P III, Creevy WR (2007) Syndesmotic instability in Weber B ankle fractures: a clinical evaluation. J Orthop Trauma 21(9):643–646Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Takao M, Ochi M, Oae K et al (2003) Diagnosis of a tear of the tibiofibular syndesmosis: the role of arthroscopy of the ankle. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85:324–329PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Weening B, Bhandari M (2005) Predictors of functional outcome following transsyndesmotic screw fixation of ankle fractures. J Orthop Trauma 19(2):102–108Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yde J, Kristensen KD (1980) Ankle fractures: supination-eversion fractures of stage IV. Primary and late results of operative and non-operative treatment. Acta Orthop Scand 51(6):981–990Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harri J. Pakarinen
    • 1
    Email author
  • Tapio E. Flinkkilä
    • 1
  • Pasi P. Ohtonen
    • 2
  • Jukka Y. Ristiniemi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Surgery, Division of Orthopedic and Trauma SurgeryOulu University HospitalOuluFinland
  2. 2.Departments of Anesthesiology and SurgeryOulu University HospitalOuluFinland

Personalised recommendations