Category: Ankle, Arthroscopy, Sports 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. At the time of surgical intervention, subjects were placed into either the screw fixation or the Suture-button device group by opening a randomized envelope in the operating room. 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 thestudy 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; four required repeat surgery for symptomatic syndesmotic screw removal, one for revision fixation, and four did not return to surgery despite hardware failure. One subject(3%) in the suture-button group required hardware removal. 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.

AIM:To compare functional outcomes and adverse events of surgically treated syndesmotic injuries with either screw(s) or suturebutton(s). It was hypothesized that suture-button fixation would provide equal clinical results with fewer adverse events. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multi-center, randomized clinical study. Sixty-five subjects with confirmed acute syndesmotic injury requiring surgical intervention were enrolled. Subjects were randomized and treated with either suture-button or screw fixation. Foot and Function Index pain, disability, and activity scores, American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society scores, and the Visual Analogue Scale for pain were reported up to 12-months. The adverse events were also collected. The forty subjects with complete data up to one year (n = 40; suture-button = 18 and screw = 22) were included in analysis. Single or multiple screws or suture-button implants were based on surgeon preference and patients' characteristics. RESULTS: There was statistically significant improvement in Foot and Function Index and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society scores with both techniques (p < 0.05). Visual Analog Scale scores improved significantly with the screw technique (p < 0.05) but not with the suture button technique. CONCLUSION: One-year clinical data suggests that acute syndesmotic injuries can be effectively treated with either technique. A possible benefit of suture button fixation may be a lower occurrence of adverse clinical events.

No abstract

Elbow arthroscopy is a useful tool for managing diseases of the elbow, including valgus extension overload, when conservative treatments have failed. Arthroscopic access to the elbow in the supine-suspended position is simple and reproducible with the technique described in this report. Synovial tissue can be cleared, optimizing visualization of the anatomic structures in the elbow including the posterior ulnohumeral joint. This report describes, in detail, arthroscopy of the elbow in the supine-suspended position and basic principles for arthroscopic decompression of the posterior elbow for valgus extension overload.

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.