Routine versus on demand removal of the syndesmotic screw; a protocol for an international randomised controlled trial (RODEO-trial)

BACKGROUND

Syndesmotic injuries are common and their incidence is rising. In case of surgical fixation of the syndesmosis a metal syndesmotic screw is used most often. It is however unclear whether this screw needs to be removed routinely after the syndesmosis has healed. Traditionally the screw is removed after six to 12 weeks as it is thought to hamper ankle functional and to be a source of pain. Some studies however suggest this is only the case in a minority of patients. We therefore aim to investigate the effect of retaining the syndesmotic screw on functional outcome.

DESIGN

This is a pragmatic international multicentre randomised controlled trial in patients with an acute syndesmotic injury for which a metallic syndesmotic screw was placed. Patients will be randomised to either routine removal of the syndesmotic screw or removal on demand. Primary outcome is functional recovery at 12 months measured with the Olerud-Molander Score. Secondary outcomes are quality of life, pain and costs. In total 194 patients will be needed to demonstrate non-inferiority between the two interventions at 80% power and a significance level of 0.025 including 15% loss to follow-up.

DISCUSSION

If removal on demand of the syndesmotic screw is non-inferior to routine removal in terms of functional outcome, this will offer a strong argument to adopt this as standard practice of care. This means that patients will not have to undergo a secondary procedure, leading to less complications and subsequent lower costs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered at the Netherlands Trial Register (NTR5965), Clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT02896998 ) on July 15th 2016.

Inguinal hernia repair in the Amsterdam region 1994-1996

In the Netherlands, approximately 30,000 inguinal hernia repairs are performed yearly. At least 15% are for recurrence. New procedures are being introduced creating discussion on which technique is the best. Currently it is not possible to choose on evidence alone because of the long follow-up that is needed. In 1996 an inventory was taken of all inguinal hernia repairs that were performed in the Amsterdam region (9 hospitals). These results were compared with the results from a similar study performed in 1994. Major changes in treatment strategy were noted. The Bassini repair was replaced by Shouldice and Lichtenstein techniques. There was a significant increase in the use of prostheses for both primary and recurrent inguinal hernias. There was no significant decrease in the percentage of operations performed for recurrent hernia from 19.5% to 16.8%. However, there was a significant decrease in operations performed for early recurrences (5.1%-3.4%) (p = 0.05). These results suggest that the Shouldice and Lichtenstein repairs may be superior to the Bassini repair in terms of early hernia recurrence.