A Prospective, Randomized Investigation of Syndesmosis Injury Fixation

Category: Ankle; Trauma Introduction/Purpose: Syndesmotic disruption occurs in 10 to 13% of all ankle fractures. It is present in 15 cases per 100,000 of the general population. There has been debate on the best treatment for syndesmotic injuries. The typical surgical treatments include fixation wit...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Eric Giza MD, Todd Oliver, Patrick S. Barousse MD, Tyler Allen, Trevor Shelton MD, Aida K. Sarcon MD, Ashoke Sathy, Wade Faerber, Johnny L. Lin MD, James P. Stannard MD, BA, Brett Crist, Gregory J. Della Rocca, James Ronan BS, Christopher D. Kreulen MD, MS
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2020-07-01
Series:Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/2473011420S00006
id doaj-eb9e55d958e0457198b0241c8a8e154e
record_format Article
spelling doaj-eb9e55d958e0457198b0241c8a8e154e2020-11-25T03:42:13ZengSAGE PublishingFoot & Ankle Orthopaedics2473-01142020-07-01510.1177/2473011420S00006A Prospective, Randomized Investigation of Syndesmosis Injury FixationEric Giza MDTodd OliverPatrick S. Barousse MDTyler AllenTrevor Shelton MDAida K. Sarcon MDAshoke SathyWade FaerberJohnny L. Lin MDJames P. Stannard MD, BABrett CristGregory J. Della RoccaJames Ronan BSChristopher D. Kreulen MD, MSCategory: Ankle; Trauma Introduction/Purpose: Syndesmotic disruption occurs in 10 to 13% of all ankle fractures. It is present in 15 cases per 100,000 of the general population. There has been debate on the best treatment for syndesmotic injuries. The typical surgical treatments include fixation with either screws or suture button devices. The purpose of this study is to compare clinical outcomes of syndesmotic injuries treated surgically with either screws or suture button devices. It was hypothesized that suture button fixation would provide equal clinical results with less need for hardware removal. Methods: This was a multi-center, randomized, prospective clinical trial comparing two surgical interventions for treatment of acute syndesmotic injury. Subjects were placed into either screw fixation or the Suture-button device group. Subjects with clinical signs or radiographic evidence of syndesmotic injury were asked to participate in this study. Inclusion criteria was ages 18 to 65 years old with confirmed syndesmotic instability. The primary outcomes of the study were VAS scores (activity, pain, satisfaction) and FFI scores (pain, disability, activity) which were collected at preoperative state, 6 weeks, and 12 months postoperatively. Results: Sixty-five subjects were enrolled in this study. Thirty-two subjects received Suture-button fixation (49%) and 33 received screw fixation (51%). VAS scores and FFI scores for subjects treated with the Suture-button device or screw fixation comparing preoperative, six-week, and 12-month scores all showed clinical improvement. There was no significant difference between the two treatment groups (p >0.05).Nine subjects (27%) in the syndesmotic screw fixation group experienced adverse events, and only one subject (3%) in the suture-button group had adverse event. Conclusion: The short-term clinical outcomes suggest that both syndesmotic screws and suture-button devices are effective treatment options to address acute syndesmotic injuries. In the short-term (12-months), suture-button fixation resulted in significantly less adverse events compared to syndesmotic screw fixation group.https://doi.org/10.1177/2473011420S00006
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Eric Giza MD
Todd Oliver
Patrick S. Barousse MD
Tyler Allen
Trevor Shelton MD
Aida K. Sarcon MD
Ashoke Sathy
Wade Faerber
Johnny L. Lin MD
James P. Stannard MD, BA
Brett Crist
Gregory J. Della Rocca
James Ronan BS
Christopher D. Kreulen MD, MS
spellingShingle Eric Giza MD
Todd Oliver
Patrick S. Barousse MD
Tyler Allen
Trevor Shelton MD
Aida K. Sarcon MD
Ashoke Sathy
Wade Faerber
Johnny L. Lin MD
James P. Stannard MD, BA
Brett Crist
Gregory J. Della Rocca
James Ronan BS
Christopher D. Kreulen MD, MS
A Prospective, Randomized Investigation of Syndesmosis Injury Fixation
Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics
author_facet Eric Giza MD
Todd Oliver
Patrick S. Barousse MD
Tyler Allen
Trevor Shelton MD
Aida K. Sarcon MD
Ashoke Sathy
Wade Faerber
Johnny L. Lin MD
James P. Stannard MD, BA
Brett Crist
Gregory J. Della Rocca
James Ronan BS
Christopher D. Kreulen MD, MS
author_sort Eric Giza MD
title A Prospective, Randomized Investigation of Syndesmosis Injury Fixation
title_short A Prospective, Randomized Investigation of Syndesmosis Injury Fixation
title_full A Prospective, Randomized Investigation of Syndesmosis Injury Fixation
title_fullStr A Prospective, Randomized Investigation of Syndesmosis Injury Fixation
title_full_unstemmed A Prospective, Randomized Investigation of Syndesmosis Injury Fixation
title_sort prospective, randomized investigation of syndesmosis injury fixation
publisher SAGE Publishing
series Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics
issn 2473-0114
publishDate 2020-07-01
description Category: Ankle; Trauma Introduction/Purpose: Syndesmotic disruption occurs in 10 to 13% of all ankle fractures. It is present in 15 cases per 100,000 of the general population. There has been debate on the best treatment for syndesmotic injuries. The typical surgical treatments include fixation with either screws or suture button devices. The purpose of this study is to compare clinical outcomes of syndesmotic injuries treated surgically with either screws or suture button devices. It was hypothesized that suture button fixation would provide equal clinical results with less need for hardware removal. Methods: This was a multi-center, randomized, prospective clinical trial comparing two surgical interventions for treatment of acute syndesmotic injury. Subjects were placed into either screw fixation or the Suture-button device group. Subjects with clinical signs or radiographic evidence of syndesmotic injury were asked to participate in this study. Inclusion criteria was ages 18 to 65 years old with confirmed syndesmotic instability. The primary outcomes of the study were VAS scores (activity, pain, satisfaction) and FFI scores (pain, disability, activity) which were collected at preoperative state, 6 weeks, and 12 months postoperatively. Results: Sixty-five subjects were enrolled in this study. Thirty-two subjects received Suture-button fixation (49%) and 33 received screw fixation (51%). VAS scores and FFI scores for subjects treated with the Suture-button device or screw fixation comparing preoperative, six-week, and 12-month scores all showed clinical improvement. There was no significant difference between the two treatment groups (p >0.05).Nine subjects (27%) in the syndesmotic screw fixation group experienced adverse events, and only one subject (3%) in the suture-button group had adverse event. Conclusion: The short-term clinical outcomes suggest that both syndesmotic screws and suture-button devices are effective treatment options to address acute syndesmotic injuries. In the short-term (12-months), suture-button fixation resulted in significantly less adverse events compared to syndesmotic screw fixation group.
url https://doi.org/10.1177/2473011420S00006
work_keys_str_mv AT ericgizamd aprospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT toddoliver aprospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT patricksbaroussemd aprospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT tylerallen aprospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT trevorsheltonmd aprospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT aidaksarconmd aprospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT ashokesathy aprospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT wadefaerber aprospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT johnnyllinmd aprospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT jamespstannardmdba aprospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT brettcrist aprospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT gregoryjdellarocca aprospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT jamesronanbs aprospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT christopherdkreulenmdms aprospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT ericgizamd prospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT toddoliver prospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT patricksbaroussemd prospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT tylerallen prospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT trevorsheltonmd prospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT aidaksarconmd prospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT ashokesathy prospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT wadefaerber prospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT johnnyllinmd prospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT jamespstannardmdba prospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT brettcrist prospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT gregoryjdellarocca prospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT jamesronanbs prospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
AT christopherdkreulenmdms prospectiverandomizedinvestigationofsyndesmosisinjuryfixation
_version_ 1724526468641325056