Transarticular external fixation versus deltoid ligament repair in treating SER IV ankle fractures: a comparative study

A systematic review on how to diagnose deltoid ligament injuries-are we missing a uniform standard?

BACKGROUND

Up to now, there is no convincing evidence, that surgical treatment of deltoid ligament injuries, especially in the setting of ankle fractures, does result in improved outcome. One reason could be a missing diagnostic standard. The aim of the current systematic review was to analyze the applied diagnostic strategies for acute deltoid ligament injuries in outcome studies.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Scopus, Central, and EMBASE were searched through February 2022 for any original studies addressing diagnostics of acute deltoid injuries. The study was conducted per the PRISMA guidelines. The inclusion criteria were formed according to the PICOS criteria. The data assessed were study type, level of evidence, included fractures, time point and method of diagnosing deltoid ligament layers, differentiation between layers and syndesmotic injuries.

RESULTS

31 studies were included in the final analysis. Most studies (n = 28) based their decision to treat the deltoid ligament injury on radiologic findings only, with stressed radiographs (n = 18) being the most common. The radiographs were applied at one or more time points (preoperative, before ORIF, after ORIF, after ORIF and syndesmotic repair). The most frequently assessed parameter was the Medial Clear Space (MCS, n = 27) with cut-off-values considered pathological ranging between MCS > 1 mm and MCS > 6 mm.

CONCLUSION

Comparing the 31 studies shows that a standardized method to diagnose deltoid ligament injuries is missing. Further research is needed to establish evidence-based guidelines on how to diagnose acute deltoid ligament injuries.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prospero ID: CRD42022307112.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

not applicable.

Deltoid ligament injuries: A review of the anatomy, diagnosis and treatments

PURPOSE

Ankle sprains remain the most common soft tissue injury presenting to Emergency Departments. Recently, there has been increased awareness and reporting of deltoid ligament injuries in association with injuries to the lateral ligament complex as well as with fibula fractures. This article reviews the currently available literature on the anatomy of the deltoid ligament, clinical and radiological diagnosis of injuries to the deltoid ligament and treatment recommendations.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted for keywords associated with deltoid ligament injuries. MEDLINE, PubMed and Embase databases were utilised for this search. Articles were included if involving an adult population, were English-language, were related to deltoid ligament injuries (with or without associated injuries) and reported on patho-anatomy, clinical or radiological diagnosis or treatment methods.

RESULTS

A total of 93 articles were assessed for relevance from the database search, and 47 were included after the removal of irrelevant articles and duplicates. Several studies reported on the clinical findings of deltoid ligament injury, as well as the radiographic analysis. Arthroscopy was considered the gold standard of diagnosis, with authors reporting on the potential benefit of performing arthroscopic repair or reconstruction at the same time. There were no studies that provided a system for the classification of deltoid ligament injury or larger studies of treatment pathways. Long-term studies of the incidence of instability in deltoid ligament injuries were not available.

CONCLUSION

There is limited evidence available regarding deltoid ligament injuries, particularly in terms of treatment options, either in isolation or with concomitant injuries. Long-term follow-up studies are needed to obtain more accurate data on the number of complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Comparison of deltoid ligament repair and non-repair in acute ankle fracture: A meta-analysis of comparative studies

Background

Rupture of the deltoid ligament (DL) in acute ankle fracture is very common. However, there is still insufficient evidence on whether to repair the DL in acute ankle fracture. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies was performed to report the outcome of DL repair in acute ankle fracture.

Methods

The PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and Web of Science databases were searched from the inception dates to October 31, 2020, for comparative studies. The methodological quality was evaluated based on the risk-of-bias tool of the Cochrane Collaboration for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) or the Risk-of-Bias Assessment Tool for Non-randomized Studies (RoBANS). The post-operative medial clear space (MCS), final MCS, American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot score, visual analogue scale (VAS) score and incidence of complications were analysed.

Results

A total of 8 comparative studies involving 388 participants who suffered Weber type B or C ankle fractures were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that the post-operative MCS, final MCS, AOFAS score and rate of complications were statistically superior in the DL repair group. For the VAS score, there was no significant difference between the DL repair group and the DL non-repair group.

Conclusions

In this meta-analysis of comparative studies, DL repair offered great advantages in terms of the post-operative MCS, final MCS, AOFAS score and rate of complications compared with non-repair. The repair of the DL in patients with acute ankle fractures might be beneficial to ankle joint stability and assist in improving the quality of ankle reduction. More high-quality and prospective studies with long follow-up durations are needed to further demonstrate the superiority of DL repair over non-repair.