Screw fixation compared with suture-button fixation of isolated Lisfranc ligament injuries

The Use of Knotless Suture Tape Construct vs Screw Fixation for Lisfranc Injuries: A Cadaveric Biomechanical Study

BACKGROUND

Lisfranc injuries are often treated with open reduction and internal fixation using rigid fixation techniques. The use of flexible fixation to stabilize the Lisfranc joint is a newer technique. The purpose of this cadaveric study is to compare the amount of diastasis at the Lisfranc interval under diminished physiologic loads when treated with a knotless suture tape construct and a solid screw.

METHODS

Ten cadavers (20 feet) had native motion at the intact Lisfranc interval assessed at multiple increasing loads (69, 138, and 207 N). The Lisfranc ligamentous complex was then disrupted, and testing repeated to evaluate the amount of diastasis. Randomization was performed to determine the type of fixation for each cadaver: solid screw or knotless suture tape construct. Once fixation was completed, specimens were cyclically loaded for 10 000 cycles at loads, and diastasis was quantified after each load cycle to compare the interventions. Diastasis was measured using motion tracking cameras and retroreflective marker sets. A non-inferiority statistical analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Diastasis mean values were confirmed to be >2 mm for all load bearing conditions in the injury model. Posttreatment, diastasis was significantly reduced when compared to the sectioned conditions (P < .01) for both treatment options. Non-inferiority analyses showed that the knotless suture tape construct did not perform inferior to screw fixation for diastasis at the Lisfranc interval at any of the compared load states.

CONCLUSION

Under the loads tested, there is no significant difference in diastasis at the Lisfranc interval when treating ligamentous Lisfranc injuries with a knotless suture tape construct or solid screws. Both reduced diastasis from the injured state and were not different from the intact state.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

In this cadaveric model with ligamentous Lisfranc injury, diastasis of a knotless suture tape construct is compared to solid screw fixation as tested.

Suture button fixation yields high levels of patient reported outcomes, return to sport, and stable fixation in isolated Lisfranc injuries: A systematic review

IMPORTANCE

Lisfranc injuries remain a significant, but often misdiagnosed, orthopaedic injury. Alongside the traditional methods of surgical fixation, including arthrodesis and open reduction and internal fixation with screws, suture button fixation is an emerging technique.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficacy of suture button fixation for treatment of Lisfranc injuries through a systematic review.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

A comprehensive literature review was conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases for original, English-language studies observing outcomes of Lisfranc injury until August 19, 2022. The clinical studies with evidence level I-IV and at least a 12 month follow-up after the index surgery were included if they examined quantifiable outcomes of Lisfranc injury treated with suture button. Articles were excluded if they included case reports, systematic reviews, comments, editorials, surveys, animal studies, or biomechanical/cadaveric studies. Variables extracted from text and figures include demographic information, return to sport measures, patient reported outcomes, and complications.

FINDINGS

Of the 10 studies included, there were 186 total patients with an age range of 13-72. In every study, all patients were able to return to sport or activity with a return time averaging from 10.8 to 25.9 weeks. Postoperative American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society scores ranged from 83.5 to 97.0 while pain Visual Analogue Scale ranged from 0.6 to 2.5. Complications were reported in four studies at a rate of 7.7% including two cases of diastasis, two cases of paraesthesia, one case of button irritation, and one of postoperative degenerative joint disease, with no reported revisions.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In our systematic review, suture button fixation shows high levels of patient reported outcomes, return to sport, and stable fixation in isolated Lisfranc injuries. This surgical technique provides a physiologic reduction across the Lisfranc joint and reduces the need for reoperation including removal of hardware. However, further evidence such as large sample size high-quality randomized controlled trials is needed to draw a definitive conclusion regarding the best treatment for Lisfranc injuries.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, Systematic Review of Level III and IV studies.

Simulated Weightbearing and Articular Injury From Transarticular Screws in a Ligamentous Lisfranc Injury Model

BACKGROUND

Transarticular screw fixation is a common surgical treatment for tarsometatarsal ligamentous (Lisfranc) injuries. Iatrogenic damage to articular cartilage from screw placement, however, has been thought to potentially lead to increased risk of tarsometatarsal (TMT) joint arthritis after initial injury. To date, no study has evaluated the effect of weightbearing on articular cartilage after screw fixation. The aim of this study was to create a Lisfranc injury and quantify and compare articular damage due to screw fixation before and after simulated weightbearing.

METHODS

A ligamentous Lisfranc injury was created in 10 cadaveric specimens and treated with transarticular screws. Specimens were cycled for 1000 cycles at 250 N to simulate 2 weeks of physiologic weightbearing. Rotation and diastasis across the Lisfranc complex were measured. Articular injury as a percentage of total articular surface was measured using digital imaging of the first and second TMT joint before and after simulated weightbearing. Comparisons between articular damage were made and statistical analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Simulated partial weightbearing increased articular injury 1.44-fold (P < .001). The second metatarsal (M2) showed the greatest increase (1.54-fold, P = .0047), whereas the first (M1) showed the least (1.35-fold, P = .0083). Increases seen at the medial (1.43-fold, P = .0387) and middle cuneiform (1.44-fold, P = .0292) were intermediate between the values seen at M2 and M1.

CONCLUSION

Articular damage from transarticular screw fixation significantly increased after simulated partial weightbearing. This may increase the risk of arthritis and future morbidity when using transarticular screws for the treatment of ligamentous Lisfranc injuries.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Iatrogenic damage to articular cartilage due to screw fixation of ligamentous Lisfranc injuries may be increased with weightbearing.

Clinical and Biomechanical Outcomes of Suture Button Fixation for Ligamentous Lisfranc Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

Flexible ligamentous fixation has increased in popularity for the treatment of ligamentous Lisfranc injury, but the optimal fixation strategy is unclear.

Purpose

To review the biomechanical, clinical, and radiographic results of ligamentous Lisfranc injuries treated with flexible fixation.

Study Design

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods

A systematic literature review was conducted according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The PubMed/Medline and Google Scholar literature databases were queried for clinical and biomechanical (cadaveric) studies relating to flexible fixation of ligamentous Lisfranc injury. Outcomes of interest included patient-reported outcome scores, clinical/biomechanical results, radiographic alignment, and return to activity. Where appropriate, meta-analysis of the postoperative outcomes was performed.

Results

Of the 34 initial studies, 14 articles (243 feet) were included in the analysis. In the 11 clinical studies (216 patients), the mean postoperative American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society score was 90.1 (n = 150; 6 studies) and the mean visual analog scale score was 1.5 (n = 137; 5 studies). The rate of return to activity was 100% (n = 35; 5 studies), and 100% of patients maintained radiographic alignment postoperatively (n = 62; 6 studies). No complications or subsequent hardware removals were reported. Of the 3 biomechanical studies (27 feet), 1 study found significantly greater change in diastasis under axial load between intact and postfixation ligaments with suture button versus screw fixation (+1.1 vs -0.1 mm; P < .05), another found no difference in the decrease in diastasis under axial load between the injured state and screw or suture button fixation (1.2 vs 1.0 mm; P = .5), and the third found no difference in displacement between intact and either screw or suture button fixation under either axial (intact vs screw: 1.0 vs 2.0 mm, P = .1; intact vs suture button: 0.6 vs 1.8 mm, P = .1) or abduction (intact vs screw: 1.5 vs 1.1 mm, P = .5; intact vs suture button: 1.3 vs 2.1 mm, P = .1) load.

Conclusion

Flexible fixation use in the treatment of ligamentous Lisfranc injury was found to have significant potential as a fixation option, as demonstrated by excellent clinical results. Biomechanical evidence was inconclusive but suggested a trend toward decreased diastasis in specimens fixed with screws compared with suture buttons.

Various Flexible Fixation Techniques Using Suture Button for Ligamentous Lisfranc Injuries: A Review of Surgical Options

Contrary to Lisfranc joint fracture-dislocation, ligamentous Lisfranc injury can lead to additional instability and arthritis and is difficult to diagnose. Appropriate procedure selection is necessary for a better prognosis. Several surgical methods have recently been introduced. Here, we present three distinct surgical techniques for treating ligamentous Lisfranc employing flexible fixation. First is the "Single Tightrope procedure", which involves reduction and fixation between the second metatarsal base and the medial cuneiform via making a bone tunnel and inserting Tightrope. Second is the "Dual Tightrope Technique", which is similar to the "Single Tightrope technique", with additional fixation of an intercuneiform joint using one MiniLok Quick Anchor Plus. Last but not least, the "internal brace approach" uses the SwiveLock anchor, particularly when intercueniform instability is seen. Each approach has its own advantages and disadvantages in terms of surgical complexity and stability. These flexible fixation methods, on the other hand, are more physiologic and have the potential to lessen the difficulties that have been linked to the use of conventional screws in the past.

Surgical controversies and current concepts in Lisfranc injuries

INTRODUCTION

Lisfranc injuries, not as rare as previously reported, range from ligamentous to complex fracture-dislocations. Anatomical studies have identified a complex of discrete structures, and defined the anatomical characteristics of the Lisfranc joint.

SOURCES OF DATA

A narrative evidence-based review encompassed and analyzed published systematic reviews. Outcomes included clinical and surgical decision-making, including clinical-presentation, diagnosis, pathological-assessment, surgical-management techniques and indications, post-surgical care and comparative outcomes.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

Better understanding of the Lisfranc complex anatomy aids surgical treatment and tactics. Prognosis is related to injury severity, estimated by the number of foot columns affected. Surgical outcome is determined by anatomical reduction for most fixation and fusion techniques. Appropriate treatment allows return to sport, improving outcome scores.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY

Identification of Lisfranc injuries may be improved by imaging modalities such as weight-bearing computer tomography. Recent evidence supports dorsal plate fixation as a result of better quality of reduction. In complex injuries, the use of combined techniques such as trans-articular screw and plate fixation has been associated with poorer outcomes, and fusion may instead offer greater benefits.

GROWING POINTS

Open reduction is mandatory if closed reduction fails, highlighting the importance of understanding surgical anatomy. If anatomical reduction is achieved, acute arthrodesis is a safe alternative to open reduction internal fixation in selected patients, as demonstrated by comparable outcomes in subgroup analysis.

AREAS FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

The current controversies in surgical treatment remain around techniques and outcomes, as randomized controlled trials are infrequent.

Comparison of flexible fixation and screw fixation for isolated Lisfranc ligament injuries: A protocol for a meta-analysis of comparative studies

BACKGROUND

The frequency of isolated Lisfranc ligament (ILL) injuries has been increasing recently with the increase in low-energy trauma resulting from sports injuries. For ILL injuries, the optimal method of fixation still remains controversial. The traditional fixation method is achieved by trans-articular screws, but recently, dorsal bridge plates and suture button (SB) fixation have become alternatives. Some biomechanical studies have showed that SB fixation can provide adequate strength compared to trans-articular screws. Therefore, a meta-analysis is imperative to provide evidence on whether flexible fixation is comparable to screw fixation for treatment of ILL injuries.

METHODS

We will conduct a comprehensive literature search in PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and Web of Science databases and for comparative studies. We will apply the risk-of-bias tool of the Cochrane Collaboration for Randomized Controlled Trials to assess the methodological quality. Risk-of-Bias Assessment Tool for Non-randomized Studies was used to evaluate the quality of comparative studies. Statistical analysis will be conducted using RevMan 5.4 software (Cochrane Collaboration, London, England).

RESULTS

This systematic review will evaluate the functional outcomes and radiographic results of flexible fixation for treatment of ILL injuries.

CONCLUSION

The conclusion of this study will provide evidence for judging whether flexible fixation is superior to screw fixation for treatment of ILL injuries.

Factors influencing postoperative residual diastasis after the operative treatment of acute Lisfranc fracture dislocation

INTRODUCTION

Clinically, surgeons may frequently encounter residual diastasis between the medial cuneiform and 2nd metatarsal base after the operative treatment of acute Lisfranc fracture dislocations. The purpose of this study was to identify factors influencing postoperative residual diastasis. We specifically focused on the preoperative fracture pattern using 3-dimensional computed tomography (3D-CT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Radiographic and clinical findings of 66 patients who underwent operative treatment for acute Lisfranc fracture dislocation were reviewed. Patients were grouped according to residual diastasis evaluated by weight-bearing anteroposterior radiograph of the foot at the final follow-up. Residual diastasis was defined as distance between the medial cuneiform and 2nd metatarsal base greater than the distance on the contralateral side by 2 mm or more. Demographic parameters and fracture patterns based on preoperative foot 3D-CT were compared. A paired t test was used to compare continuous numeric parameters, while a Chi-square test was used for the proportional parameters. Statistical significance was set at P value less than 0.05 for all analyses.

RESULTS

The mean age at operation, sex, body mass index, and the rate of underlying diabetes were not significantly different between the two groups (P > 0.05 each). Preoperative foot 3D-CT evaluation showed that the rate of large (> 25% of 2nd tarsometatarsal joint involvement), displaced (> 2 mm) fracture fragments on the plantar side of the 2nd metatarsal base was more pronounced in the group with residual diastasis (P = 0.001), while medial wall avulsion of the 2nd metatarsal base was more frequent in the group without residual diastasis (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

While treating acute Lisfranc injuries, surgeons should be aware of the presence of a 2nd metatarsal base plantar fracture. A dorsoplantar inter-fragmentary fixation can be considered if the fragment is large and displaced.

Biomechanical Comparison of Fiber Tape Device Versus Transarticular Screws for Ligamentous Lisfranc Injury in a Cadaveric Model

BACKGROUND

The preferred method of fixation and surgical treatment for ligamentous Lisfranc injuries is controversial. Transarticular screws, bridge plating, fusion, and flexible fixation have been described, yet none have demonstrated superiority. Furthermore, screw fixation and plating often require secondary surgery to remove implants, leading surgeons to seek alternative fixation methods.

PURPOSE

To compare transarticular screws and a fiber tape construct under a spectrum of biomechanical loads by evaluating the diastasis at 3 joints in the Lisfranc complex.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

Eight matched pairs of fresh, previously frozen lower extremity cadaveric specimens were fixed with either 2 cannulated transarticular crossed screws or a fiber tape construct with a supplemental intercuneiform limb. The diastasis between bones was measured at 3 midfoot joints in the Lisfranc complex: the Lisfranc articulation, the second tarsometatarsal joint, and the intercuneiform joint. Measurements were obtained for the preinjured, injured, and fixation conditions under static loading at 50% donor body weight. Specimens then underwent cyclic loading performed at 1 Hz and 100 cycles, based on 100-N stepwise increases in ground-reaction force from 100 to 2000 N, to simulate postoperative loading from the partial weightbearing stage to high-energy activities. Failure of fixation was defined as diastasis ≥2 mm at the Lisfranc articulation (second metatarsal-medial cuneiform joint).

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in diastasis detected at the Lisfranc articulation or the intercuneiform joint throughout all loading cycles between groups. All specimens endured loading up to 50% body weight + 1400 N. Up to and including this stage, there were 2 failures in the cannulated transarticular crossed-screw group and none in the fiber tape group.

CONCLUSION

The fiber tape construct with a supplemental intercuneiform limb, which does not require later removal, may provide comparable biomechanical stability to cannulated transarticular crossed screws, even at higher loads.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Ligamentous Lisfranc injuries are common among athletes. Therefore, biomechanical evaluations are necessary to determine stable constructs that can limit the time to return to play. This study compares the biomechanical stability of 2 methods of fixation for ligamentous injury through a wide spectrum of loading, including those experienced by athletes.

Shortening the Return-to-Play Times in Elite Athletes With Unstable Isolated Lisfranc Ligament Injuries Using a Knotless Interosseous Suture Button: Case Series and Literature Review

Background:

Isolated unstable Lisfranc ligament injuries in elite athletes are associated with a lengthy period of rehabilitation and prolonged absence from competition.

Purpose:

To assess the efficacy of a knotless, interosseous suture button system for repairing isolated unstable ligamentous Lisfranc injuries and its capacity to allow accelerated rehabilitation with earlier weightbearing and return-to-play times in elite athletes.

Study Design:

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

The authors retrospectively reviewed data from a prospectively compiled database for elite athletes treated by a single surgeon. All included patients had clinical and magnetic resonance imaging evidence of an unstable isolated complete ligamentous Lisfranc injury requiring surgical reduction and stabilization. All patients underwent surgery using a knotless interosseous suture button to achieve stabilization, followed by a standardized postoperative regimen involving full weightbearing at 4 weeks, and all had a minimum postoperative follow-up of 2 years.

Results:

Included were 12 patients: 7 National Rugby League (NRL) players, 2 professional dancers, 1 Olympic gymnast, 1 professional wakeboarder, and 1 professional NRL referee. The mean age of the patients was 21.1 years (range, 16-34 years). Ten patients underwent acute surgical stabilization within 3 weeks of the injury, and 2 patients sustained chronic isolated Lisfranc instability that was initially treated nonoperatively. All athletes were able to return to full weightbearing by 4 weeks postoperatively, successfully returned to training by 9 to 12 weeks, and returned to full competition by 12 to 16 weeks. No major complications were reported.

Conclusion:

Knotless interosseous suture button stabilization was a reliable treatment option for both acute and chronic isolated ligamentous Lisfranc injuries in these elite athletes. This technique does not require hardware removal, allows early weightbearing with accelerated rehabilitation, and may shorten the return-to-play interval.

Treatment of paediatric Lisfranc injuries: A systematic review and introduction of a novel treatment algorithm

BACKGROUND

Pediatric Lisfranc injuries (PLI) are rare injuries that have few studies published about their occurrence and treatment in pediatric population. Due to this lack of information, the diagnostic criteria and surgical or non-surgical methods for treatment have not been clearly established within the pediatric orthopedic literature. The objective of this study was to review the published literature related to treatment options and develop a concise stepwise treatment algorithm for pediatric patients presenting with Lisfranc injuries.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted using PubMed to find studies discussing the treatment of PLI with reported long-term outcomes. Data collection accounted for the mechanism of injury, diagnostic imaging modality used, injury type, fracture classification using the Myerson system, treatment method used, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

An initial PubMed search revealed 290 articles, but only 10 studies fulfilled the criteria for in-depth review. A total of 114 patients were included in this review from the selected case reports and case series studies. Primary treatment methods were as follows: 44% (50/114) with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) using Kirschner wires (K-wires) and/or screws, 3% (3/114) with closed reduction percutaneous fixation (CRPF), 4% (4/114) with suture-button constructs, 20% (23/114) with cast immobilization, and 29% (33/114) were described as not requiring reduction.

CONCLUSION

There were two main limitations to this study. First, there are few published studies with longitudinal outcomes of PLI treatment. Second, some case series did not disclose which procedure a patient with post-treatment complications underwent. Therefore, an overall statistical analysis of success and failure rates with associated complications of each procedure could not be conducted. In conclusion, we found that a stepwise approach to evaluating conservative and surgical treatment options based on the presentation of the PLI should be utilized to optimize long-term outcomes.

Occupational Outcomes and Return to Running After Operative Management of Lisfranc Injuries in a High-Demand Population

Background: Literature evaluating outcomes following operative fixation of Lisfranc injuries has demonstrated high rates of chronic disability, particularly in those returning to prior levels of physical function. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the occupational outcomes and return to running after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) or arthrodesis for Lisfranc fracture-dislocations in a moderate- to high-demand military cohort. Methods: All active-duty servicemembers undergoing ORIF or primary arthrodesis (Current Procedural Terminology 28615 and 28730, respectively) for confirmed Lisfranc fracture-dislocations (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision codes 838.03 or 838.13) with minimum 2-year follow-up were isolated from the Military Health System. Demographic and surgical variables were recorded. Return to military function, return to running, perioperative morbidity, and rates of reoperation for complication were the outcomes of interest. Univariate analysis followed by multivariate logistic regression determined the association between patient demographics, type of fracture fixation (ie, ORIF vs arthrodesis) and functional outcomes, including medical separation. Results: Among Lisfranc injuries, 64 patients underwent ORIF while 6 underwent primary arthrodeses with a mean age of 28.1 years. At mean follow-up of 3.5 years (range, 2.0-6.3 years), 20% of servicemembers underwent medical separation due to limitations related to their injuries. body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m² (OR 17.67; 95% CI, 3.69-84.53) and Army or Marines service branch (OR 3.86; 95% CI, 1.08-13.86) were significant independent predictors for medical separation. Among servicemembers undergoing ORIF or primary arthrodeses, 69% returned to occupationally required daily running during the follow-up period. Servicemembers with a BMI <30 kg/m² were more likely to return to running (OR 13.14, 95% CI, 2.50-69.19). Radiographic evidence of posttraumatic Lisfranc osteoarthritis occurred in 10 (16%) servicemembers who underwent internal fixation, and 82% of ORIF patients underwent implant removal. Conclusions: At mean 3.5-year follow-up, 80% of servicemembers undergoing ORIF or primary arthrodeses for Lisfranc injuries remained on active duty or successfully completed their military service, and 69% were able to resume occupationally required daily running. Surgeons should preoperatively counsel patients with these injuries on the possibility of persistent long-term disability.Levels of Evidence: Level IV: Retrospective series.

Impact of the Subtle Lisfranc Injury on Foot Structure and Function

BACKGROUND

The subtle Lisfranc injury is the disruption of the osteoligamentary complex between the first cuneiform and the second metatarsal, resulting in minor widening of this space that is often difficult to detect with plain radiographs. In this study, we assessed the results after treatment of the different stages of subtle Lisfranc injuries, focusing on their impact on foot arch anatomy and functionality at short- to midterm follow-up.

METHODS

A retrospective study including patients treated in our center for a subtle Lisfranc injury between 2012 and 2019 was conducted. Demographic, epidemiologic, radiographic, and clinical data were obtained and assessed, focusing on foot arch structure and foot function, which was evaluated with the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot score and the Foot Function Index (FFI).

RESULTS

A total of 42 patients with a mean age of 49 ± 17.5 years were included, with an average of 4.3 years' follow-up (range, 1-8). Stage I injuries according to Nunley classification represented 19% and were treated conservatively. Stage II (66.7%) and stage III (14.3%) injuries were treated operatively, via osteosynthesis with screws (74%), K-wires (19%), or plates (7%). Flattening of foot arch after treatment was observed in 42.9% of patients, with significant increases in Costa-Bertani (12 ± 7 degrees), Hibbs (7 ± 6 degrees), and Meary (3 ± 1 degrees) angles. Other complications included complex regional pain syndrome (28.6%) and painful hardware (23.8%). Secondary joint arthrodesis was needed in 16.6% of patients. Chronic pain was present in 71.4% of patients with a mean visual analog scale (VAS) pain score at final follow-up of 4 of 10 points. Results in AOFAS midfoot score and FFI were 87.4 ± 8.3 and 15 ± 6.4, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The subtle Lisfranc injury shows dissociation between the initial relatively mild radiographic changes and important future complications. Chronic pain and foot arch flattening were not uncommon. Overall foot function in the short- or midterm was found to be modestly diminished in this somewhat heterogenous cohort.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Fixation of isolated Lisfranc ligament injury with the TightRope™: A technical report

Treatment of Lisfranc ligament injury is still debatable. For this reason, we applied a standard suture button (TightRope™, Arthrex, Naples, FL), a device originally designed for syndesmosis fixation, in treating isolated Lisfranc ligament (ILL) injuries. Twelve patients diagnosed as having an ILL injury were recruited. All patients regained their previous activity level within 3 months after the surgery without any complications. We propose that standard suture button device in an ILL injury is an easy technique to perform with short learning curve, accompanied with satisfactory outcomes.

The Lisfranc Injury: A Literature Review of Anatomy, Etiology, Evaluation, and Management

Despite being first described in the 1800s, the Lisfranc injury remains one of the most controversial topics in foot and ankle surgery. From the basic anatomy of the ligament complex to the optimal diagnostic and management methods, new research both sharpens and yet confounds our understanding of this unique injury. This article reviews the literature from established and classic papers to recent studies evaluating newer techniques. We discuss the unique bony and ligamentous anatomy, which confer strength to the Lisfranc complex, the typical mechanisms of injury, the most common classification systems, the clinical presentation, current imaging modalities, and conservative and surgical treatment options. We review studies comparing open reduction and internal fixation with primary arthrodesis of acute injuries, in addition to studies evaluating the various methods for obtaining fixation, including intra-articular screws, dorsal plates, and flexible fixation. It is clear from this review that despite the vast number of studies in the literature, much is still to be learned about the diagnosis and management of this challenging injury.Levels of Evidence: Level V: Expert opinion.

Screw in Lisfranc Ligament

Background. Injury to the Lisfranc interosseous ligament is currently managed with a screw. However, this can potentially further disrupt the ligament. The objective of this study was to observe the proximity of the screw or disruption it can cause at the ligament attachment sites. Methods. Twenty-three feet were studied. A 40-mm, 4.0, partially threaded, cannulated screw was inserted from the base of the second metatarsal into the medial cuneiform. The relationship of the ligament attachment sites to the screw hole were measured. Results. The screw hole contacted at least 1 of the ligament attachment sites in 20 of the 23 feet. The screw hole fully penetrated it in 7 feet, partially disrupted it in 4 feet, and had less than or equal to 1 mm of contact in 9 feet. There was no contact with either of the attachment sites in 3 feet, with an average distance of 1.5 mm separating them. Conclusion. Our results show the proximity of the ligament to the screw and the disruption that can result from its insertion. This is clinically relevant as some amount ligamentous disruption is likely to occur with insertion of the "Lisfranc screw," which may interfere with its healing process.Levels of Evidence: Level V: Expert opinion includes case reports and technique tips.

Lisfranc Fixation Techniques and Postoperative Functional Outcomes: A Systematic Review

The optimal method of fixation of acute Lisfranc injuries is yet to be established. We aim to systematically review the literature to identify the impact of fixation method on postoperative functional outcomes. A systematic review was undertaken using the PRISMA framework to identify all studies reporting postoperative functional outcomes in patients who underwent open-reduction internal fixation of acute Lisfranc injuries. Studies reporting outcomes of numerous fixation methods were divided into fixation subcohorts. Studies comparing bridge plate with transarticular screw fixation were included for meta-analysis, conducted using a random-effects model. Seventeen studies (20 subcohorts) with 462 patients were included. Mean patient age was 29.6 (rang, 15-81) years. Mean follow-up was 38.7 (range 11 to 287) months. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons midfoot score (AOFAS-MF) was the most frequently reported functional outcome (16/20 subcohorts). Overall weighted mean AOFAS-MF was 76.3 ± 9.4 for all cases, with 74.2 ± 9.4 for transarticular screws and 79.2 ± 8.3 for bridge plates. The mean difference between screw and plate was not statistically significant (mean difference = 5.0, 95% confidence interval, -4.8 - 14.8, p = .3). A single study reported AOFAS-MF mean of 92 using suture button fixation. Meta-analysis of the 2 available comparative studies revealed higher postoperative AOFAS-MF with bridge plate fixation (pooled standardized mean difference, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.87, p = .006). There is scarcity of literature examining the impact of fixation method on postoperative functional outcomes in acute Lisfranc injuries. A small number of studies have reported superior functional outcomes with use of bridge plate fixation. Further evidence is needed to ascertain which injuries are best managed with each fixation method or whether 1 fixation construct is universally superior.

Treatment of Lisfranc Injuries Using Interosseous Suture Button: A Retrospective Review of 84 Cases With a Minimum 3-Year Follow-Up

Lisfranc fracture dislocation is an injury often encountered by the foot and ankle surgeon. This injury, depending on the severity and level of energy, has been shown to lead to posttraumatic osteoarthritis and chronic pain if undiagnosed or improperly managed. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the surgical repair with the use of an interosseous suture button for Lisfranc injuries with isolated ligamentous disruption. From 2008 through 2016, 104 patients were consecutively enrolled who underwent open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) of the Lisfranc complex with a suture button and stabilization of the medial and intermediate cuneiform with a 4.0-mm screw. Eighty-four patients were available for a 3-year minimum follow-up. The mean return to full weightbearing was 11 days protected in a controlled ankle motion (CAM) boot. American Orthopedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) and visual analog scale (VAS) scores improved from 30 and 8.4, respectfully, preoperatively to 90 and 1.3 postoperatively. The mean preoperative step-off between the second metatarsal base and intermediate cuneiform was found to be 3.15 mm. The immediate postreduction weightbearing radiograph measured 0.25 mm and 0.43 mm at the final follow-up evaluation, a difference that was found to be significant. There were no revision arthrodeses performed and no removal of the suture button during this time period. ORIF using an interosseous suture button appears to have an adequate medium-term patient satisfaction; however, there is evidence of minimal diastasis in some patients at 3 years postoperatively in ligamentous Lisfranc fracture dislocations.

Percutaneous Reduction and 2.7-mm Cortical Screw Fixation for Low-Energy Lisfranc Injuries

To use the advantages of transarticular screw fixation while minimizing iatrogenic involved joint damage and screw irritation, it is important to determine the screw size. The aim of this study was to analyze the outcomes of percutaneous reduction and 2.7-mm cortical screw fixation for low-energy Lisfranc injuries and determine whether the procedure is a safe alternative to traditional screw fixation using a larger screw size. A review was performed for all patients who underwent percutaneous reduction and 2.7-mm cortical screw fixation for low-energy Lisfranc injuries at a single institution over a 6-year period. Thirty-one patients were enrolled in this study. Patients were assessed clinically and radiographically for demographics, foot function index (FFI), numerical rating scale (NRS) for pain, patient satisfaction, and complication rates. Factors affecting screw breakage and its clinical relevance were also analyzed. The FFI and NRS for pain were 17.2 ± 14.7 (range 0.8 to 57.8) and 3.1 ± 2.3 (range 0 to 8) points, respectively, at the 12-month follow-up visit. One patient (3.2%) underwent arthrodesis for the development of posttraumatic arthritis; all other patients recovered without sequelae. Screw breakage was identified in 7 patients (22.6%). There was no significant difference between patients with and without screw breakage in terms of FFI, NRS for pain, patient satisfaction, or complication rate. Body mass index (BMI) was significantly higher in patients with screw breakage than in those without screw breakage. Receiver operator characteristics curve analysis demonstrated a strong relationship between BMI and screw breakage (area under the curve = 90%, p < .001), and the potential BMI cutoff value was 27.8 kg/m². After considering the incidence of screw breakage, percutaneous reduction and 2.7-mm cortical screw fixation can be a viable option for treating low-energy Lisfranc injuries in nonobese patients, especially those with BMI <27.8 kg/m².

A mid-term follow-up retrospective evaluation of tarsometatarsal joint fracture-dislocations treated by closed reduction and percutaneous K-wires fixation

INTRODUCTION

Injuries involving the tarsometatarsal (TMT) joint are relatively uncommon, and the surgical treatment is potentially characterized by a high complications rate. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the results of the treatment of Lisfranc fracture-dislocations treated with closed reduction and percutaneous fixation with K-wires, considering complications and re-intervantion rate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review was performed on all patients undergone closed reduction and percutaneous fixation with K-wires of a Lisfranc fracture-dislocation. Patients have been clinically evaluated at last follow up by American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot score and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), as well as by radiograph assessment.

RESULTS

Following inclusion and exclusion criteria, 15 patients have been included, with a mean age of 48.2 ± 5.6 years. Average follow-up was 3.8 ± 1.8 years (range 1-6). 7 fractures analyzed were classified as type A, 7 as type B (3 were B1, 4 were B2) and 1 as type C1. No case of loss of reduction has been observed at radiographic 1-month follow-up. At last follow-up mean AOFAS midfoot score and VAS score were respectively 82.2 ± 10.4 and 1.5 ± 1.3. Registered complications showed one deep vein thrombosis and 2 cases of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). One patient subsequently underwent arthrodesis of the tarsometatarsal joint for post-traumatic arthritis.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment of the fracture-dislocations of the Lisfranc joint by percutaneous reduction and fixation with K-wire can achieve good clinical outcomes with a low rate of complications and reoperations.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Lisfranc injuries in adolescents: A case report and literature review

Lisfranc injuries result if bones or ligaments that support the midfoot are torn. In children and adolescents these injuries are not only rare, but are also similar to adult Lisfranc injuries, in that they are often mistaken especially if the injury is a result of a straightforward twist and fall. The goal of surgical treatment is to realign the joints. However, few studies related to Lisfranc injuries in pediatric patients exist. A case of 15 years old patient treated using an Arthrex mini tight rope is described.

Suture Button vs Conventional Screw Fixation for Isolated Lisfranc Ligament Injuries

BACKGROUND

Suture buttons have been used for isolated Lisfranc ligament (ILL) fixation. However, no study has reported on its clinical and radiologic outcomes.

METHODS

In this retrospective comparative study, patients with ILL injuries were divided into 2 groups according to the treatment method: 32 conventional screw group and 31 suture button group. The clinical and radiologic outcomes at preoperation, 6 months and 1 year postoperation, and last follow-up period were measured. Plantar foot pressure was measured at postoperative month 6 months. Postoperative complications at the last follow-up were evaluated.

RESULTS

The suture button group showed better American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society midfoot scale (P < .001) and visual analog scale (P < .001) scores compared with the conventional screw fixation group at the postoperative month 6 period before screw removal. However, no significant difference in clinical outcome between the 2 groups was found at postoperative year 1 or last follow-up. No differences in radiologic outcomes were found between the 2 groups. Plantar foot pressure was significantly elevated in the conventional screw group at the great toe and first metatarsal head area compared with the contralateral foot just before screw removal. Recurrent Lisfranc joint diastasis was found in a single case in the conventional screw group and 2 cases in the suture button group.

CONCLUSION

Suture button fixation in the treatment of ILL injuries may provide comparable fixation stability and clinical outcome with conventional screw fixation in the early postoperative period.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective case-control study, therapeutic.

Biomechanical Comparison of Fibertape Device Repair Techniques of Ligamentous Lisfranc Injury in a Cadaveric Model

BACKGROUND

Lisfranc ligamentous injuries are complex, and their treatment, along with the preferred method of fixation, is controversial. Implementing a flexible synthetic augmentation device (fibertape) has been described as an alternative to traditional screw fixation. This biomechanical study evaluated two fibertape devices with interference screw fixation: InternalBrace, and InternalBrace with supplementary intercuneiform stabilization.

METHODS

The diastasis and relative angular displacement between bones were measured at three midfoot joints in the Lisfranc articulation. Measurements were obtained for the pre-injured, injured, and post-fixation stages under static loading. Specimens then underwent stepwise increases in cyclic loading performed at 1 Hz and 100 cycles, at 100 N ground reaction force intervals from 500 to 1200 N to simulate postoperative loading, and then up to 1800 N to simulate high loads. Failure of fixation was defined as diastasis greater than 2 millimeters at the second-metatarsal - medial-cuneiform joint.

RESULTS

InternalBrace specimens demonstrated failures in 3 of 9 (33%) specimens at cyclic loads of 1000 N. Conversely, InternalBrace with Supplementary Limb specimens had 1 failure at 1200 N. The difference in diastasis at the second metatarsal-medial cuneiform joint was statistically significant between the two groups at higher loads of 1600N (p = 0.019) and 1800N (p = 0.029).

CONCLUSION

The use of InternalBrace for ligamentous Lisfranc injuries appears to provide a biomechanically viable alternative for withstanding early postoperative protected weight bearing. Furthermore, the use of a supplementary limb in addition to the InternalBrace fibertape fixation method appears to enhance its biomechanical efficacy.

Sports-Related Lisfranc Injuries and Recognition of Lisfranc Variants: Surgical Strategies for Stabilization

Much has changed since Lisfranc described lesions at the tarsometatarsal (TMT) joint in 1815. What was considered an osseous high-energy condition nowadays is understood as myriad possible presentations, occurring in minor and inconspicuous traumas. Advancements in diagnostics of Lisfranc injury allow recognizing many variants of this trauma presentation, most of them with a focus on ligaments. This perception shifted trends in surgical planning, especially for implants and fixation techniques. These revolutions established a new and evolving universe around TMT lesions, different from what was known only a few years ago and still not enough to completely settle the disease scenario.

Pediatric and adolescent Lisfranc injuries - Presentation, treatment and outcomes

PURPOSE

Lisfranc fracture dislocations are rare injuries and even more so in the pediatric population. The main purpose of our study is to present a descriptive analysis of Lisfranc injuries in pediatric patients to add to the current sparse literature on this topic. In addition, our secondary outcome was to analyze any differences in patients treated conservatively versus operatively, and those with isolated Lisfranc injuries versus those with associated foot injuries.

METHODS

Charts of patients with Lisfranc injury treated at a tertiary pediatric hospital from January 2010 to July 2019 were reviewed to analyze their demographics, injury characteristics, management details and rehabilitation protocol. Functional outcome was assessed using the Visual Analogue Scale of Pain (VAS) and the Oxford Ankle Foot Questionnaire for Children (OxAFQ-C).

RESULTS

30 patients/cases were included with mean age of 13.6 years and mean follow up of 36 weeks. 20% of the cases were missed on initial presentation. 19 cases were managed operatively while 11 were managed conservatively. The average OxAFQ-C and VAS pain scores were 83% and 1.3, respectively at mean follow-up of 36 weeks. The functional outcomes between conservative and operative cases or between those with isolated Lisfranc injuries and those with associated foot injuries were not statistically significant (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Lisfranc injury in pediatrics can be easily missed. High index of suspicion, a thorough clinical examination and the use of advanced imaging is warranted. Various modalities like K-wires, screws and suture-buttons can be used for fixation. Early to mid-term functional outcomes are satisfactory provided that adequate reduction is obtained.

Updates on Lisfranc Complex Injuries

Lisfranc injuries are a disruption of one or more of the tarsometatarsal joints and have an estimated incidence of 1/55 000 people. However, the total number of Lisfranc injuries could be underreported, because almost 20% of these injuries are initially missed. Because of the relative infrequency of these injuries, the current literature is inconsistent in regard to proper treatment. This article provides a review of Lisfranc complex injuries including relevant anatomy, diagnosis, treatment, classifications, operative approaches, and outcomes and complications. Based on existing evidence, it also proposes an algorithm the authors prefer for the evaluation and treatment of Lisfranc complex injuries.

Optimizing Return to Play for Common and Controversial Foot and Ankle Sports Injuries

»

Surgical decision-making should consider factors to help optimize return to play for athletes with foot and ankle injuries, including injuries to the syndesmosis, the Achilles tendon, the fifth metatarsal, and the Lisfranc complex. Understanding influential factors on return to play may help orthopaedic surgeons counsel athletes and coaches on expectations for a timeline to return to play and performance metrics.

»

Outcomes after rigid and flexible fixation for syndesmotic injuries are generally favorable. Some data support an earlier return to sport and higher functional scores with flexible fixation, in addition to lower rates of reoperation and a decreased incidence of malreduction, particularly with deltoid repair, if indicated.

»

Minimally invasive techniques for Achilles tendon repair have been shown to have a decreased risk of wound complications. Athletes undergoing Achilles repair should expect to miss a full season of play to recover.

»

Athletes with fifth metatarsal fractures have better return-to-play outcomes with surgical management and can expect a high return-to-play rate within approximately 3 months of surgery.

»

Percutaneous treatment of Lisfranc injuries may expedite return to play relative to open procedures.

Subtle Lisfranc Injuries: Fix It, Fuse It, or Bridge It?

The management of Lisfranc injuries is challenging considering the broad spectrum of energy involved and highly variable clinical presentation. Despite the advances in surgical techniques, subtle Lisfranc injuries can lead to chronic pain and permanent disability. Surgical treatment is mandatory for all the unstable injuries; however, the best surgical technique remains controversial. The most predictive factor for a successful outcome is the maintenance of anatomic alignment; therefore, the selection of the appropriate surgical technique is of paramount importance. This article reviews the current treatment options and describes the selection of the surgical technique based on the different clinical presentations.

Study of the functional results of the percutaneous surgical treatment of subtle injuries of the tarso-metatarsian complex

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

The concept subtle Lisfranc defines low energy lesions of the tarsometatarsal joint complex (TMC) that involve joint instability. Often unnoticed, with long-term sequelae. The objective is to evaluate the clinical-functional results of patients with MTC ligament damage grade II-III (Nunley and Vertullo classification) treated with percutaneous surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective study of 16 patients who underwent percutaneous surgery for MLC ligament damage. Demographic data, days of delay in diagnosis, surgical technique, joint reduction in load (adequate if C1-M2 space is less than 2 mm) and Manchester-Oxford scale (MOXFQ) score were collected. The sample consisted of nine males and seven females, mean age 43.6 years (17-71) and mean follow-up of 22 months (12-28).

RESULTS

Diagnosis was delayed for more than 24 hours in four patients (3-6 days). In 11 patients the treatment consisted of closed reduction and percutaneous synthesis with cannulated screws from M2 to C1 and from C1 to C2. In three patients it was supplemented with Kirschner wires in the lateral radii. Two patients were treated with only M2 to C1 screws. An anatomical reduction was not achieved in six patients, with a mean of 2.6 mm between C1-M2 (2.1-3 mm); the mean functional MOXFQ score of these patients was 41.1% (IC 95% 23.1-59.1%), worse results compared to the anatomical reduction: 17.2% (IC 95% 5.7-28.7); statistically significant difference (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Subtle injuries from MTC are rare and can go unnoticed. Surgical treatment with percutaneous synthesis offers good clinical-functional results in the medium term. The anatomical reduction is a determining factor for the good functional result of our patients.

Low-Energy Lisfranc Injuries: When to Fix and When to Fuse

Lisfranc injuries can be devastating to the athlete and nonathlete. In the athletic population, minor loss of midfoot stability compromises the high level of function demanded of the lower extremity. The most critical aspect of treatment is identifying the injury and severity of the ligamentous/articular damage. Not all athletes are able to return to their previous level of function. With appropriate treatment, a Lisfranc injury does not mandate the cessation of an athletic career. We focus on the diagnosis and an algorithmic approach to treatment in the athlete discussion the controversy of open reduction and internal fixation versus arthrodesis.

Comparison of Suture-Augmented Ligamentplasty to Transarticular Screws in a Lisfranc Cadaveric Model

BACKGROUND

Lisfranc injuries represent a spectrum of trauma from high-energy lesions, with significant instability of the midfoot, to low-energy lesions, with subtle subluxations or instability without gross displacement. Recently, treatment options that allow for physiologic fixation of this multiplanar joint are being evaluated. The purpose of this study was to analyze the stability of a cadaveric Lisfranc injury model fixed with a novel suture-augmented neoligamentplasty in comparison with a traditional transarticular screw fixation construct.

METHODS

Twenty-four fresh-frozen, matched cadaveric leg and foot specimens (12 individuals younger than 65 years of age) were used for this study. Two different types of Lisfranc ligament injuries were tested: partial and complete. Two different methods of fixation were compared: transarticular screws and augmented suture ligamentplasty with FiberTape. Specimens were fixed to a rotation platform in order to stress the joints while applying 400 N of axial load and internal and external rotation. Six distances were measured and compared between the intact, injured, and fixed states with a 3D Digitizer arm, in order to evaluate the stability between them. Analysis of variance was used with P < .05 considered significant.

RESULTS

Using distribution graphs and analyzing the grouped data, it was observed that there was no difference between the 2 stabilization methods, but the augmented suture ligamentplasty presented lower variability and observed distance shortenings were more likely to be around the mean. The variability of the stabilization with screws was 2.9 times higher than that with tape (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

We suggest that augmented suture ligamentplasty can achieve similar stability to classic transarticular screws, with less variability.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This cadaveric study adds new information on the debate about Lisfranc lesions treatment. Flexible fixations, such as the synthethic ligamentplasty used, can restore good stability such as conventional transarticular screws.

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.

Flexible fixation for ligamentous lisfranc injuries

Lisfranc injuries require anatomic reduction and stabilization of the tarsometatarsal joints. We describe a novel technique that provides flexible fixation that is simple, cost-effective and that may offer certain advantages over more traditional techniques.

Flexible Fixation Technique for Lisfranc Injuries

Injuries to the Lisfranc complex range from purely ligamentous disruptions to fracture-dislocations of the tarsometatarsal joint. Treatment options include closed/open reduction with percutaneous pinning, open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), and primary arthrodesis. We present a ligament reinforcement technique utilizing a flexible fixation device for the treatment of ligamentous Lisfranc injuries. Level of Evidence: Level V, expert opinion.

Anatomical Pathology of Subtle Lisfranc Injury

The extent and patterns of Lisfranc joint complex disruption in subtle Lisfranc injuries have not been well clarified. We reviewed the direct intraoperative findings for 87 patients, examined computed tomography images that had been obtained preoperatively for 73 of the patients, and classified the injuries according to the Kaar  et al. criteria as the transverse type (instability between the first cuneiform [C1] and the second metatarsal [M2] and between the second cuneiform [C2] and M2) or longitudinal type (instability between C1 and M2 and between C1 and C2). Our patients’ injuries were classified as follows: longitudinal type (38%), transverse type (30%), transverse type and first tarsometatarsal (TMT) joint injury (20%), longitudinal type plus transverse type (7%), longitudinal type and first TMT joint injury (3%), and longitudinal type, transverse type, and first TMT joint injury (2%). In 11 patients, the longitudinal injury extended into the naviculo-first cuneiform joint. In 41 (56%) of the 73 patients for whom CT images were obtained, 1 or more fractures (not counting small avulsion fragments between C1 and M2) were found. Orthopedic surgeons should be aware of the various injury patterns possible in cases of subtle Lisfranc injury.

Flexible Fixation in Foot and Ankle Surgery

Flexible fixation has been described and utilized in various aspects of foot and ankle surgery over the past several decades. In regards to ankle surgery, flexible fixation devices have been used for stabilization of the ankle syndesmosis and augmentation of lateral collateral ankle ligament repair. In the foot, flexible fixation devices have been incorporated into hallux valgus or varus correction, Lisfranc injury repair, and more recently spring ligament repair augmentation. This article reviews the various applications for flexible fixation in foot and ankle surgery, as well as evidence-based literature on surgical applications and clinical outcomes.

Ligamentous Lisfranc Injury: A Biomechanical Comparison of Dorsal Plate Fixation and Transarticular Screws

OBJECTIVES

Optimal fixation technique after purely ligamentous Lisfranc injury remains controversial. This biomechanical study compares dorsal plate versus transarticular screw fixation by measuring dorsal and plantar joint diastasis. A unique protocol was developed, using reflective triad markers and positional cameras.

METHODS

Eleven cadaveric matched pairs were assigned to either transarticular screw or dorsal plate fixation. Two reflective triad markers were placed into the medial cuneiform (C1) and second metatarsal base (MT2). Three cameras recorded the 3-dimensional location of triads to quantify C1-MT2 diastasis in the following states: intact Lisfranc ligament (INTACT), cut ligament (CUT), fixed (SCREW or PLATE) joint, and fixed joint after 10,000 loaded cycles. On completion, the plantar Lisfranc ligament insertions were identified, and plantar diastasis was determined using additional reflective triads. Statistical post hoc pairwise comparisons assessed differences in diastasis.

RESULTS

C1-MT2 diastasis in the CUT state increased relative to INTACT (P < 0.001). SCREW fixation reduced C1-MT2 diastasis relative to CUT at dorsal (P < 0.007) and plantar (P = 0.015) locations after cycling. PLATE fixation significantly reduced dorsal diastasis relative to CUT (P < 0.001) but not for plantar diastasis (P > 0.99). PLATE plantar diastasis was numerically higher than INTACT but not significantly (P > 0.39). PLATE plantar diastasis tended to be greater than SCREW before cycling (P = 0.068) and after cycling (P = 0.080).

CONCLUSIONS

Transection of the Lisfranc ligament complex yielded C1-MT2 diastasis. Both SCREW and PLATE fixation successfully reduced dorsal diastasis. However, upon load, the PLATE resulted in greater plantar diastasis, nearly statistically different relative to the SCREW. Cyclic loading at 343 N did not worsen diastasis.

InternalBrace has biomechanical properties comparable to suture button but less rigid than screw in ligamentous lisfranc model

Purpose

The aim of this study was to investigate the biomechanical properties of the InternalBrace for lisfranc injuries.

Methods

A Sawbone model was developed comparing screw, suture button and InternalBrace.

Results

When loaded in axial tension at 0.5 mm/s, the screw was stiffest (2,240 N/mm), while the InternalBrace (200 N/mm) was stiffer than the suture button (133 N/mm). Cyclic loading with 10,000 cycles of 69 N, 138 N, and 207 N showed the InternalBrace maintained stiffness, but fatigued earlier than the suture button.

Conclusion

The mechanical properties of the InternalBrace support clinical use, but further studies are needed regarding early weight bearing.

Feasibility of Transosseous Nonarticular Fixation of Lisfranc Injuries

BACKGROUND

The optimal techniques for Lisfranc open reduction and internal fixation techniques remain debated. The purpose of the current study was to describe the joints involved in Lisfranc fixation and to determine if nonarticular transosseous internal fixation would be possible.

METHODS

Twenty cadaver Lisfranc joints were dissected and the articular cartilage was quantified by calibrated digital imaging software. Utilizing CT data, a computational model of the foot was developed and the mean joint surface was mapped and nonarticular screw paths between bones was determined.

RESULTS

For the medial-middle cuneiform (C1-C2) connection, 27.3% of the lateral face of C1 and 43.7% of the medial face of C2 was articular cartilage. Three variations of articular morphology were observed on C1 and 2 on C2. From the 3D models, it was determined that a joint-sparing, transosseous screw trajectory was possible between C1 and the second metatarsal and between C1 and C2. These screw paths were large enough to accommodate clinically useful screw diameters (>5 mm). The screw trajectories were roughly perpendicular to the long axis of the foot and take a plantar-medial to dorsal-lateral orientation.

CONCLUSION

The articular surface of the Lisfranc joint was quantified for the first time and may be smaller than some surgeons realize. This study demonstrated the orientation required to minimize articular damage.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The clinical significance of the current study was that a nonarticular screw trajectory was possible, and this information may help guide the placement of these screws.

Adolescent Lisfranc injury treated with TightRopeTM: A case report and review of literature

BACKGROUND

Lisfranc injuries are rare and can be easily missed. This injury is extremely rare in children, with limited published data. Different treatment options have been described; one of the options in adults is the “mini” TightRope™ Syndesmosis Device that provides non-rigid fixation with impressive results. However, there is no reference regarding the use of this device in children.

CASE SUMMARY

We describe the case of an 11-year-old girl who sustained a Lisfranc injury of her right foot that was initially missed in the Accident and Emergency department of her local hospital. This case was a ligamentous/periosteal sleeve avulsion type of Lisfranc injury and a percutaneous technique using the “mini” TightRope™ syndesmosis device was used. Clinical and radiological results were excellent at final follow up.

CONCLUSION

The “mini” TightRope™ syndesmosis device is a promising method of fixation for children with certain Lisfranc injuries. This method has many advantages, including the non-rigid type of the fixation and no need for subsequent metalwork removal.

Biomechanical comparison of fixation stability using a Lisfranc plate versus transarticular screws

BACKGROUND

To obtain adequate fixation in treating Lisfranc soft tissue injuries, the joint is commonly stabilized using multiple transarticular screws; however iatrogenic injury is a concern. Alternatively, two parallel, longitudinally placed plates, can be used to stabilize the 1st and 2nd tarsometatarsal joints; however this may not provide adequate stability along the Lisfranc ligament. Several biomechanical studies have compared earlier methods of fixation using plates to the standard transarticular screw fixation method, highlighting the potential issue of transverse stability using plates. A novel dorsal plate is introduced, intended to provide transverse and longitudinal stability, without injury to the articular cartilage.

METHODS

A biomechanical cadaver model was developed to compare the fixation stability of a novel Lisfranc plate to that of traditional fixation, using transarticular screws. Thirteen pairs of cadaveric specimens were tested intact, after a simulated Lisfranc injury, and then following implant fixation, using one method of fixation randomly assigned, on either side of each pair. Optical motion tracking was used to measure the motion between each of the following four bones: 1st metatarsal, 2nd metatarsal, 1st cuneiform, and 2nd cuneiform. Testing included both cyclic abduction loading and cyclic axial loading.

RESULTS

Both the Lisfranc plate and screw fixation method provided stability such that the average 3D motions across the Lisfranc joint (between 2nd metatarsal and 1st cuneiform), were between 0.2 and 0.4mm under cyclic abduction loading, and between 0.4 and 0.5mm under cyclic axial loading. Comparing the stability of fixation between the Lisfranc plate and the screws, the differences in motion were all 0.3mm or lower, with no clinically significant differences (p>0.16).

CONCLUSIONS

Diastasis at the Lisfranc joint following fixation with a novel plate or transarticular screw fixation were comparable. Therefore, the Lisfranc plate may provide adequate support without risk of iatrogenic injury to the articular cartilage.

Evaluation of the Area of the Lisfranc Ligament Damaged by Screw Fixation

BACKGROUND

A cannulated screw is currently the standard fixation method to reduce and stabilize diastasis at the lisfranc joint following injury. Currently, there is no literature examining the area of the lisfranc ligament damaged by screw placement. The objective of this investigation is to define the area of the ligament damaged by fixation with a 3.5-mm cannulated screw.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twelve cadaveric feet were dissected to identify the Lisfranc ligament metatarsal insertion site and origin on the medial cuneiform. A 3.5-mm cannulated screw was then passed over the course of the ligament and removed. The Lisfranc joint was then dissected to measure the dimensions of the ligament and damage from screw passage at the origin and insertion using imaging software.

RESULTS

Mean injury area on the metatarsal was 3.49 mm² and the area of injury for the cuneiform was 3.33 mm². The mean percent of the area damaged was calculated to be 1.75% and 2.43% at the cuneiform and metatarsal, respectively.

CONCLUSION

A proportionally small area of the Lisfranc ligament is disrupted following screw fixation, but the implications of this on ligament healing and outcomes remain to be elucidated.

LEVELS OF EVIDENCE

Level V: Cadaveric study.

Management of Midfoot Fractures and Dislocations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To outline the classic and recent literature of midfoot fractures and dislocations.

RECENT FINDINGS

There has been an evolution of implant technology to include mini-fragment fixation, suture fixation, and staples. Their efficacy is still being elucidated in the literature. Also, there has been a recent push for primary fusion, which we will discuss. Open reduction internal fixation of the midfoot remains to be the gold standard treatment, to which all other treatments are compared. It remains to be seen if adjunct fixation techniques are efficacious enough to provide a good result. Further study is needed to determine which patients are likely to progress to debilitating arthrosis and require fusion.

Reoperation Rate Differences Between Open Reduction Internal Fixation and Primary Arthrodesis of Lisfranc Injuries

BACKGROUND

Controversy persists as to whether Lisfranc injuries are best treated with open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) versus primary arthrodesis (PA). Reoperation rates certainly influence this debate, but prior studies are often confounded by inclusion of hardware removal as a complication rather than as a planned, staged procedure inherent to ORIF. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate whether reoperation rates, excluding planned hardware removal, differ between ORIF and PA. A secondary aim was to evaluate patient risk factors associated with reoperation after operative treatment of Lisfranc injuries.

METHODS

Between July 1991 and July 2016, adult patients who sustained closed, isolated Lisfranc injuries with or without fractures and who underwent ORIF or PA with a minimum follow-up of 12 months were analyzed. Reoperation rates for reasons other than planned hardware removal were examined, as were patient risk factors predictive of reoperation. Two hundred seventeen patients met enrollment criteria (mean follow-up, 62.5 ± 43.1 months; range, 12-184), of which 163 (75.1%) underwent ORIF and 54 (24.9%) underwent PA.

RESULTS

Overall and including planned procedures, patients treated with ORIF had a significantly higher rate of return to the operation room (75.5%) as compared to those in the PA group (31.5%, P < .001). When excluding planned hardware removal, however, there was no difference in reoperation rates between the 2 groups (29.5% in the ORIF group and 29.6% in the PA group, P = 1). Risk factors correlating with unplanned return to the operation room included deep infection ( P = .009-.001), delayed wound healing ( P = .008), and high-energy trauma ( P = .01).

CONCLUSION

When excluding planned removal of hardware, patients with Lisfranc injuries treated with ORIF did not demonstrate a higher rate of reoperation compared with those undergoing PA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Subtle Lisfranc Injuries: A Topical Review and Modification of the Classification System

Lisfranc injuries are relatively uncommon. No specific incidence of subtle injuries has been reported; however, almost one-third are missed on initial review. These missed injuries are a common cause of litigation. Although seen in high-energy injuries with direct application of forces, they are also associated with lower-energy indirect mechanisms, often on the athletic field. This article provides a topical review of subtle Lisfranc disruptions, focusing on contemporary perspectives, and describes a modification to the most prevalent classification system. [Orthopedics. 2018; 41(2):e168-e175.].

Biomechanical Comparison of Fully Threaded Solid Cortical Versus Partially Threaded Cannulated Cancellous Screw Fixation for Lisfranc Injuries

There currently exists an array of operative strategies to manage Lisfranc injuries. Modular fixation systems present surgeons with a choice between fully threaded solid cortical (FSC) and partially threaded cannulated cancellous (PCC) bone screws when using a transarticular screw approach. It is currently unknown how screw design influences fixation strength in Lisfranc reconstructions. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical differences of FSC and PCC screws using a cadaveric model of a simulated Lisfranc injury and controlled benchtop experiments. Ten matched pairs of cadaveric feet received an acute Lisfranc injury and were repaired with FSC or PCC screws. Diastasis was measured between the medial and intermediate cuneiforms and the first and second metatarsals during simulations of partial weight bearing. Three-point bending and axial pull-out tests were performed to characterize screw mechanics that could not be measured within the cadaveric model. Screw design did not affect cuneiform or metatarsal diastasis. Neither screw loosening nor deformation was observed following cadaveric testing. Bending tests indicated FSC screws had higher ultimate strength, but there was no significant difference in yield load. Partially threaded cannulated cancellous bone screws exhibited superior axial pull-out strength. Fully threaded solid cortical and PCC screws provide equal amounts of fixation strength during partial weight bearing and similar resistance to deformation under bending loads. Partially threaded cannulated cancellous screws may simplify the operative procedure and minimize nonoptimal screw placement. If a clinician so desires, PCC screws may be used in lieu of FSC screws without sacrificing fixation strength. [Orthopedics. 2018; 41(2):e222-e227.].

The Role of Implant Removal in Orthopedic Trauma

Although implant removal is common after orthopedic trauma, indications for removal remain controversial. There are few data in the literature to allow evidence-based decision-making. The risk of complications from implant removal must be weighed against the possible benefits and the likelihood of improving the patient's symptoms.