Kong Roderick, Viswanathan Shashidharan, Razii Nima, Hazarika Shariff
Trauma and Orthopaedics, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, Glasgow, GBR.
Cureus. 2024 Jul 21;16(7):e65051. doi: 10.7759/cureus.65051. eCollection 2024 Jul.
Ankle fractures associated with disruption of the syndesmotic complex could potentially have poorer outcomes if missed or malreduced at the time of surgery. Favourable results have been reported for the suture button (SB) technique and may provide advantages over standard screw fixation of the syndesmosis, although this remains the gold standard method in many units.
To compare the outcomes of syndesmotic screws (SS) with SB fixation of the syndesmosis during ankle fracture fixation at a high-volume orthopaedic department of a Scotland trauma unit.
A cross-sectional, retrospective study looking at ankle fracture fixations was undertaken at the Clyde Trauma Unit, Paisley. Relevant information was obtained from electronic patient records for 457 ankle fracture patients between August 2019 and February 2022 and followed up for six months. The digital patient archive system (PACS) was used for evaluating radiographs. Patients were divided into two groups depending on whether they had an SS or SB fixation of their syndesmosis. We focused on the surgical and radiological outcomes following syndesmotic fixation as no functional scores following surgery were conducted on the patients.
Out of the entire study group, 26.3% (120/457 patients) required syndesmotic fixation. Within the syndesmotic fixation group, 70.8% (85/120 patients) underwent SS fixation, and 29.2% (35/120 patients) had an SB fixation. Both groups were statistically well-matched. Additionally, 21.1% (18/85) of SS fixation went on to have a second surgical procedure (four fixation failures, five planned removals, five for pain/stiffness, two infections, and two metalwork breakage/migration), whereas 8.6% (3/35) of the SB fixation group had a secondary procedure - two for fixation failures and one for infection.
We reported a higher incidence of associated syndesmotic injury in our series of 457 ankle fractures than previously described. There were significantly fewer sequelae in the SB group compared to the SS fixation group (P = 0.0464). Although we did not observe a statistically significant difference in the rate of reoperation (P = 0.1184), this is likely due to the small numbers in the SB group. Our study suggests that SB fixation may be associated with a lower rate of reoperation for post-op complications such as metalwork failure, pain, and stiffness (21.1% SS vs 8.6% SB). Regardless of the fixation method used, accurate reduction of the ankle mortice and syndesmosis is a key step to a successful surgical outcome.
伴有下胫腓联合复合体损伤的踝关节骨折,如果在手术时漏诊或复位不良,可能会导致预后较差。尽管在许多科室,标准的下胫腓螺钉固定仍是金标准方法,但已有报道称缝合纽扣(SB)技术取得了良好效果,且可能优于下胫腓联合的标准螺钉固定。
在苏格兰一家创伤中心的大型骨科科室,比较下胫腓螺钉(SS)与下胫腓联合SB固定在踝关节骨折固定中的效果。
在佩斯利的克莱德创伤中心进行了一项关于踝关节骨折固定的横断面回顾性研究。从2019年8月至2022年2月期间457例踝关节骨折患者的电子病历中获取相关信息,并进行了为期6个月的随访。使用数字患者存档系统(PACS)评估X线片。根据下胫腓联合采用SS固定还是SB固定,将患者分为两组。由于未对患者进行术后功能评分,我们重点关注下胫腓联合固定后的手术和影像学结果。
在整个研究组中,26.3%(120/457例患者)需要下胫腓联合固定。在下胫腓联合固定组中,70.8%(85/120例患者)采用了SS固定,29.2%(35/120例患者)采用了SB固定。两组在统计学上匹配良好。此外,SS固定组中有21.1%(18/85)的患者需要进行二次手术(4例固定失败、5例计划取出、5例因疼痛/僵硬、2例感染以及2例金属植入物断裂/移位),而SB固定组中有8.6%(3/35)的患者需要进行二次手术——其中2例因固定失败,1例因感染。
我们报道的457例踝关节骨折系列中下胫腓联合损伤的发生率高于以往描述。与SS固定组相比,SB组的后遗症明显更少(P = 0.0464)。尽管我们未观察到再次手术率存在统计学显著差异(P = 0.1184),但这可能是由于SB组样本量较小。我们的研究表明,SB固定可能与金属植入物失败、疼痛和僵硬等术后并发症的再次手术率较低相关(SS组为21.1%,SB组为8.6%)。无论采用何种固定方法,准确复位踝关节和下胫腓联合是手术成功的关键步骤。