Ligament strain and ankle joint opening during ankle distraction

Albert, J. S.; Reiman, Paul; Njus, Glen O.; Kay, David J.; Theken, Randy

doi:10.1016/0749-8063(92)90010-9

Cited by 32 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…9 Ankle distraction can also cause ligamentous strain when greater than 135 N of force is used. 1 A study by Young et al 34 showed that there was a 6.8% complication rate (80% neurologic) with standard noninvasive distraction during anterior arthroscopy. The complications during posterior arthroscopy have been reported to be 9.8% and include nerve dysesthesias (44%) and Achilles tightness (25%).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The complications during posterior arthroscopy have been reported to be 9.8% and include nerve dysesthesias (44%) and Achilles tightness (25%). 1,23 In addition, anesthesia-related complications during prone positioning include skin necrosis, altered ventilation, and even postoperative visual loss. 12,28 There were many strengths in our cadaveric study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of Ankle Position and Noninvasive Distraction on Arthroscopic Accessibility of the Distal Tibial Plafond

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Ankle Position and Noninvasive Distraction on Arthroscopic Accessibility of the Distal Tibial Plafond

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is important since the dynamic responses to stress and strain between scar tissue, ankle joint capsule and intact or partially ruptured ligaments differ greatly. Additionally, the role of the active stabilizers needs to be considered, since it will otherwise result in a high variability depending on the exact dynamic execution of measurements . Also, the direction of force applied in respect to the ankle position is not standardized even though most use pressure application at the calcaneus while restricting anterior movement of the tibia.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vivo arthrometer measurements of mechanical ankle instability—A systematic review

Lohrer²,

Gollhofer

et al. 2019

Journal Orthopaedic Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chronic ankle instability is caused by functional and/or mechanical deficits. To differentiate the two entities, mechanical ankle instability can be assessed using arthrometers. The measurement of mechanical instability is essential, since it can only be addressed surgically. The aim of this systematic literature review was to find out whether chronic mechanical ankle instability could be adequately and objectively assessed using in vivo arthrometer measurements. Articles were included if the main focus was to evaluate the contribution of mechanical deficits to chronic ankle instability and if they provided sufficient description of the device used. This systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA-recommendations. Initially 47 articles were screened for eligibility, of which 33 studies reporting 10 different devices were included. While the reliability of the measurements was mostly good to excellent, only two studies aimed to assess the sensitivity and specificity of their results in regard to chronic ankle instability. Several devices reported conflicting results about mechanical deficits. In summary, this systematic review reveals a substantial deficit in diagnostic accuracy when assessing mechanical ankle instability in a clinical setting. Biases in recruiting and classification of participants raise the question whether the two entities of functional and mechanical ankle instability are properly defined. Clinical Significance: In recent years, this may have led to a misinterpretation of mechanical deficits and the subsequent need for surgical intervention. ß 2019

show abstract

“…is chosen, it should be applied in such a way as to allow access to additional posterior portals if required and the distraction force should be limited to 135N to avoid damage to collateral ligaments [37]. There is also a risk of injury to neurovascular structures at both the tibial and calcaneal transfixion sites [38].…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%