Management of sports injuries of the foot and ankle: An update

Turf Toe Injuries in the Athlete: an Updated Review of Treatment Options, Rehabilitation Protocols, and Return-to-Play Outcomes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

First metatarsophalangeal joint sprains or turf toe (TT) injuries occur secondary to forceful hyperextension of the great toe. TT injuries are common among athletes, especially those participating in football, soccer, basketball, dancing, and wrestling. This review summarizes the current treatment modalities, rehabilitation protocols, and return-to-play criteria, as well as performance outcomes of patients who have sustained TT injuries.

RECENT FINDINGS

Less than 2% of TT injuries require surgery, but those that do are typically grade III injuries with damage to the MTP joint, evidence of bony injury, or severe instability. Rehabilitation protocols following non-operative management consist of 3 phases lasting up to 10 weeks, whereas protocols following operative management consist of 4 phases lasting up 20 weeks. Athletes with low-grade injuries typically achieve their prior level of performance. However, among athletes with higher grade injuries, treated both non-operatively and operatively, about 70% are expected to maintain their level of performance. The treatment protocol, return-to-play criteria, and overall performance outcomes for TT injuries depend on the severity and classification of the initial sprain. For grade I injuries, players may return to play once they experience minimal to no pain with normal weightbearing, traditionally after 3-5 days. For grade II injuries, or partial tears, players typically lose 2-4 weeks of play and may need additional support with taping when returning to play. For grade III injuries, or complete disruption of the plantar plate, athletes lose 4-6 weeks or more depending upon treatment strategy.

Screws Alone for Acute Lisfranc Injuries Fixed Without Arthrodesis: A Better "Value" Than Plating in the Short Term

This study compares outcomes of patients with Lisfranc injuries treated with screw only fixation constructs to those treated with dorsal plate and screw constructs. Seventy patients who underwent surgical treatment for acute Lisfranc injury without arthrodesis and minimum 6-month (mean >1-year) follow-up were identified. Demographics, surgical information, and radiographic imaging were reviewed. Cost data were compared. The primary outcome measure was the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Surgery (AOFAS) midfoot score. Univariate analysis through independent sample t tests, Mann-Whitney U, and chi-squared compared the populations. Twenty-three (33%) patients were treated with plate constructs and 47 (67%) with screw only fixation. The plate group was older (49 ± 18 vs 40 ± 16 years, p = .029). More screw constructs treated isolated medial column injuries compared to plate constructs (92% vs 65%, p = .006). At latest follow-up (mean 14 ± 13 months), all tarsometatarsal joints were aligned. There was no difference in AOFAS midfoot scores. Plate patients experienced longer operations (131 ± 70 vs 75 ± 31 minutes, p < .001) and tourniquet time (101 ± 41 vs 69 ± 25 minutes, p = .001). Plate constructs were more expensive than screw ($2.3X ± $2.3X vs $X ± $0.4X, p < .001) ($X is the mean cost of screws alone). Plate patients had a higher incidence of wound complications (13% vs 0%, p = .012). Treatment of Lisfranc fracture dislocation injuries with screws only demonstrated a higher value procedure as similar outcomes were found amidst lower implant costs. Screw only fixation required a shorter operative and tourniquet time with less frequent wound complications. Screw only fixations proved mechanically sound enough to achieve goals of repair without inferior outcomes.

In-Season Management of Acute and Subacute Sports Foot Injuries

In athletes, foot injuries present with a variety of mechanisms, severity, and implications for return to play. Although potentially given less attention than knee and shoulder injuries by the team physician, foot injuries are common and thus require knowledgeable consideration. In this article, we review the anatomy, presentation, workup, and management of several of the most common athletic foot injuries, including turf toe, Lisfranc injuries, Jones fractures, and navicular stress fractures. The goal is to provide the team physician with the information necessary to evaluate and manage these injuries on the sideline and in the training room.

Turf Toe Review

Turf toe is a term used to describe myriad injuries to the metatarsophalangeal complex of the great toe, which have been associated with the introduction of artificial turf surfaces in sport. If not diagnosed early and treated properly, these injuries can result in chronic pain and loss of mobility. Accurate injury grading through physical exam and advanced imaging is essential to guide treatment, thereby minimizing long-term complications and maximizing an athlete's recovery and return to play. Levels of Evidence: Level V.

Biomechanical Evaluation With a Novel Cadaveric Model Using Supination and Pronation Testing of a Lisfranc Ligament Injury

Background:

Lisfranc joint injuries can be due to direct or indirect trauma and while the precise mechanisms are unknown, twisting or axial force through the foot is a suspected contributor. Cadaveric models are a useful way to evaluate injury patterns and models of fixation, but a frequent limitation is the amount of joint displacement after injury. The purpose of this study was to test a cadaveric model that includes axial load, foot plantarflexion and pronation-supination motion, which could re-create bone diastasis similar to what is seen in subtle Lisfranc injuries. Our hypothesis was that applying pronation and supination motion to a cadaveric model would produce reliable and measurable bone displacements.

Methods:

Twenty-four fresh-frozen lower leg cadaveric specimens were used. The medial (C1) and intermediate (C2) cuneiforms and the first (M1) and second (M2) metatarsal bones were marked. A complete ligament injury was performed between C1-C2 and C1-M2 in 12 specimens (group 1), and between C1-C2, C1-M2, C1-M1, and C2-M2 in 12 matched specimens (group 2). Foot pronation and supination in addition to an axial load of 400 N was applied to the specimens. A 3D digitizer was used to measure bone distances.

Results:

After ligament injury, distances changed as follows: C1-C2 increased 3 mm (23%) with supination; C1-M2 increased 4 mm (21%) with pronation (no differences between groups). As expected, distances between C1-M1 and C2-M2 only changed in group 2, increasing 3 mm (14%) and 2 mm (16%), respectively (no differences between pronation and supination). M1-M2 and C2-M1 distances did not reach significant difference for any condition.

Conclusions:

Pronation or supination in addition to axial load produced measurable bone displacements in a cadaveric model of Lisfranc injury using sectioned ligaments. Distances M1-M2 and C2-M1 were not reliable to detect injury in this model.

Clinical Relevance:

This new cadaveric Lisfranc model included foot pronation-supination in addition to axial load delivering measurable bone diastasis. It was a reliable Lisfranc cadaveric model that could be used to test different Lisfranc reconstructions.

Primary arthrodesis versus open reduction internal fixation for complete Lisfranc fracture dislocations: a retrospective study comparing functional and radiological outcomes

BACKGROUND

The aims of this retrospective study were to compare the functional and radiological outcomes of primary arthrodesis and open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) for the treatment of complete Lisfranc fracture dislocations.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of 39 patients treated for a complete Lisfranc fracture dislocation, defined as Myerson types A and C2, over a period of 8 years at a level 1 trauma centre was performed. Of these, 18 underwent primary arthrodesis, and 21 ORIF. The primary outcome measures included the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society score, the validated Manchester Oxford Foot Questionnaire functional tool, and the secondary outcome was the radiological Wilppula classification of anatomical reduction.

RESULTS

Significantly better functional outcomes were seen in the primary arthrodesis group. These patients had a mean Manchester Oxford Foot Questionnaire score of 30.1 points, compared with 45.1 for the ORIF group (P = 0.017). Similarly, the mean American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society score was 71.8 points in the fusion group versus 62.5 in the ORIF group (P = 0.14). Functional outcome was dependent on the quality of final reduction (P < 0.001). Primary arthrodesis achieved good initial reduction in 83% cases compared to 62% with ORIF (P = 0.138). There was a loss of reduction quality of 47% in the ORIF group over time.

CONCLUSION

Primary arthrodesis for complete Lisfranc fracture dislocations resulted in improved functional outcomes and quality of reduction compared to open reduction and internal fixation.

Dorsal bridge plating or transarticular screws for Lisfranc fracture dislocations: a retrospective study comparing functional and radiological outcomes

Aims

The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the functional and radiological outcomes of bridge plating, screw fixation, and a combination of both methods for the treatment of Lisfranc fracture dislocations.

Patients and Methods

A total of 108 patients were treated for a Lisfranc fracture dislocation over a period of nine years. Of these, 38 underwent transarticular screw fixation, 45 dorsal bridge plating, and 25 a combination technique. Injuries were assessed preoperatively according to the Myerson classification system. The outcome measures included the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, the validated Manchester Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) functional tool, and the radiological Wilppula classification of anatomical reduction.

Results

Significantly better functional outcomes were seen in the bridge plate group. These patients had a mean AOFAS score of 82.5 points, compared with 71.0 for the screw group and 63.3 for the combination group (p < 0.001). Similarly, the mean Manchester Oxford Foot Questionnaire score was 25.6 points in the bridge plate group, 38.1 in the screw group, and 45.5 in the combination group (p < 0.001). Functional outcome was dependent on the quality of reduction (p < 0.001). A trend was noted which indicated that plate fixation is associated with a better anatomical reduction (p = 0.06). Myerson types A and C2 significantly predicted a poorer functional outcome, suggesting that total incongruity in either a homolateral or divergent pattern leads to worse outcomes. The greater the number of columns fixed the worse the outcome (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Patients treated with dorsal bridge plating have better functional and radiological outcomes than those treated with transarticular screws or a combination technique. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:468-74.