Objective “Lisfranc joint injury” is comprised of a tarsometatarsal joint‐complex injury. The Lisfranc complex injury is always a challenge for orthopedists, and the optimum treatment is still up for debate. Anatomic reduction and stable internal fixation prove to have no satisfactory outcomes. This research aims to compare the clinical curative effects, complications and radiographic features of arthrodesis and non‐fusion of the Lisfranc joint in the follow‐up of the patients who suffered Lisfranc injuries. Methods A comparative retrospective study of 25 patients with acute or subacute Lisfranc complex injuries was conducted between September 2013 and March 2015 in the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University. All patients were classified by Myerson classification. Eight patients were treated with arthrodesis, while 17 patients received non‐fusion operations. The clinical curative effects, complications and image differences were compared between the two groups. American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) hindfoot score, Short Form‐36 (SF‐36) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score were evaluated for each patient during the follow‐up. All statistics were analyzed using the SPSS software system. Results All fractures healed for both the arthrodesis group and the non‐fusion group. Patients in the arthrodesis group had a higher AOFAS score compared with patients in the non‐fusion group (94.00 vs. 88.58, P = 0.034). Complications occurred in eight patients (8/17, 47%) in the non‐arthrodesis group, including the second and third phalanx abduction (1), talipes cavus (2), eversion deformity of front foot (3), eversion deformity of calcaneus (1), as well as postoperative infection (1). Only two patients (2/8, 25%) in the arthrodesis group suffered complications. One was a limitation of motion of the front foot and pain during walking; the other was an eversion deformity of front foot. Conclusion Primary arthrodesis has advantages compared to primary open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF): reduced foot deformity rates, sustained biomechanical morphology of the feet, reduced complications, higher level of function recovery, shorter time of surgical procedures, fewer complications, higher AOFAS score and fewer frequency of complications. According to our research, primary arthrodesis may be a better choice for treating Lisfranc injury.
BackgroundMueller-Weiss disease is a rarely diagnosed deformity where the navicular bone undergoes spontaneous osteonecrosis in adults. Until now, there is no widely accepted operative treatment for this unusual disease. We aimed to compare clinical and radiological outcomes between the open triple fusion and talonavicular-cuneiform arthrodesis for Mueller-Weiss disease of stage 4.MethodsDuring the period from February 2012 to June 2016, 10 patients (11 feet) suffering from Mueller-Weiss disease of stage 4 were treated by the same senior surgeon. Among them, 5 patients (5 feet) were treated with open triple fusion and 5 patients (6 feet) were treated with talonavicular-cuneiform arthrodesis. Clinical outcomes were evaluated by American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot score. Radiological results were assessed based on the X-ray and CT. Postoperative complications were also recorded.ResultsThere were no significant differences in AOFAS score between the two groups (p = 0.1 > 0.05). For the open triple fusion, the average AOFAS ankle-hindfoot score improved from 30.2 ± 3.27 preoperatively to 79 ± 3.81 at the last follow-up (p = 0.008). And for the talonavicular-cuneiform (TNC) arthrodesis, the average AOFAS ankle-hindfoot score improved from 33.2 ± 5.63 preoperatively to 86.2 ± 3.49 at the last follow-up (p = 0.007).ConclusionsBoth triple fusion and TNC arthrodesis are reasonable methods for the treatment of Mueller-Weiss disease if properly used. It is crucial to use radiological assessment to evaluate the involved joints preoperatively and then chose the appropriate method to treat different patients.
Background This study aims to explore the relationship between surgically-induced ankle instability and posttraumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA) in a mouse model, and to provide reference for clinical practice. Results Ligamentectomy was performed on 24 eight-week-old male C57BL/6 J mice, which were divided into three groups. Both the anterior talofibular ligament (ATFL) and the calcaneofibular ligament (CFL) were severed in the CFL + ATFL group, while only the CFL was removed in the CFL group. The SHAM group was set as the blank control group. A wheel-running device was used to accelerate the development of ankle osteoarthritis (OA). Balance measurement, footprint analysis, and histological analysis were used to assess the degree of ankle instability and OA. According to the balance test results, the CFL + ATFL group demonstrated the highest number of slips and the longest crossing beam time at 8 weeks postoperatively. The results of gait analysis exhibited that the CFL + ATFL group had the most significant asymmetry in stride length, stance length, and foot base width compared to the CFL and SHAM groups. The OARSI score of the CFL + ATFL group (16.7 ± 2.18) was also much higher than those of the CFL group (5.1 ± 0.96) and the SHAM group (1.6 ± 1.14). Conclusion Based on the mouse model, the findings indicate that severe ankle instability has nearly three times the chance to develop into ankle OA compared to moderate ankle instability.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.