Foot and Ankle Research and Innovation Lab, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Foot and Ankle Research and Innovation Lab, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Injury. 2022 Jun;53(6):2318-2325. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2022.02.040. Epub 2022 Feb 19.
To compare diagnostic parameters for Lisfranc instability on WB and NWB radiographs and to assess the inter-observer reliability of a standardized diagnostic protocol.
Patients who had undergone surgical treatment for subtle, purely ligamentous Lisfranc injury with both WB and NWB post-injury, pre-surgery films (n = 26) were included in this multicentre, retrospective comparative study. Also included was a control group (n = 26) of patients with isolated fifth metatarsal avulsion fractures who similarly had both WB and NWB films. Multiple midfoot distance and alignment measurements were used to evaluate the Lisfranc joint on both WB and NWB views. To evaluate interobserver reliability, measurements were made by two independent observers across a cohort subset.
When comparing the NWB views between groups, only C1M2 (medial cuneiform- second metatarsal) distance was found to be significantly larger (∆ = 1.35 mm, p <0.001) for Lisfranc injuries. Most notably, C2M2 (Intermediate cuneiform - second metatarsal) step off-caused by lateral translation of the second metatarsal base-was not significantly different (∆ = 0.39 mm, p = 0.101) between Lisfranc patients and controls. On WB views, Lisfranc patients had significantly larger changes to C1M2 distance and C2M2 step-off as compared to controls (∆ = 2.97 mm, p <0.001 and ∆ = 1.98 mm, p <0.001 respectively). M1M2 (first to second intermetatarsal) distance was not significantly different between patients and controls in WB films. Within the cohort of ligamentous Lisfranc patients, C1M2 distance and C2M2 step-off were significantly larger in WB when compared to NWB films (∆ = 1.77 mm, p <0.001 and ∆ = 1.58 mm, p <0.001 respectively). For these parameters, inter-observer reliability scores (ICC) of >0. 90 were found when interpreting WB radiographs and ICC's ranging between 0.61 and 0.80 were found when interpreting NWB radiographs.
Using WB imaging for diagnosing subtle Lisfranc instability reveals larger diastasis in the tarsometatarsal joint and has a higher interobserver reliability compared to NWB imaging. Clinical concern for subtle or occult Lisfranc instability in any patient should therefore trigger WB radiographic assessment since such injuries may be missed on NWB views.
比较 WB 和 NWB 射线照片中 Lisfranc 不稳定性的诊断参数,并评估标准化诊断方案的观察者间可靠性。
这项多中心回顾性比较研究纳入了 26 例因轻微、纯韧带性 Lisfranc 损伤而行手术治疗的患者,这些患者在受伤后和手术前均接受了 WB 和 NWB 射线照片检查(n=26)。还纳入了 26 例单纯第五跖骨撕脱骨折的患者作为对照组,这些患者也接受了 WB 和 NWB 射线照片检查。使用多个中足距离和对线测量值来评估 WB 和 NWB 视图中的 Lisfranc 关节。为了评估观察者间的可靠性,由两名独立观察者在队列子集中进行测量。
当比较两组的 NWB 视图时,仅发现 C1M2(内侧楔骨-第二跖骨)距离在 Lisfranc 损伤中明显更大(∆=1.35mm,p<0.001)。值得注意的是,第二跖骨基底外侧平移引起的 C2M2(中间楔骨-第二跖骨)台阶差没有明显差异(∆=0.39mm,p=0.101),Lisfranc 患者和对照组之间。在 WB 视图上,与对照组相比,Lisfranc 患者的 C1M2 距离和 C2M2 台阶差有明显变化(∆=2.97mm,p<0.001 和 ∆=1.98mm,p<0.001)。在 WB 片中,患者和对照组之间的 M1M2(第一至第二跖骨间)距离无显著差异。在韧带性 Lisfranc 患者队列中,与 NWB 片相比,WB 片中的 C1M2 距离和 C2M2 台阶差明显更大(∆=1.77mm,p<0.001 和 ∆=1.58mm,p<0.001)。对于这些参数,当解释 WB 射线照片时,观察者间可靠性评分(ICC)>0.90,而当解释 NWB 射线照片时,ICC 介于 0.61 和 0.80 之间。
与 NWB 成像相比,使用 WB 成像诊断轻微 Lisfranc 不稳定性可揭示跗跖关节更大的分离,且具有更高的观察者间可靠性。因此,对于任何有轻微或隐匿性 Lisfranc 不稳定性的患者,临床均应考虑进行 WB 放射学评估,因为 NWB 视图可能会漏诊此类损伤。