Outcomes After Percutaneous Reduction and Fixation of Low-Energy Lisfranc Injuries

Vosbikian, Michael M.; O’Neil, Joseph T.; Piper, Christine C.; Huang, Ronald; Raikin, Steven M.

doi:10.1177/1071100717706154

Cited by 29 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 25 publications

(34 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although some investigators reported that the open anatomic reduction and bridge plate fixation is the best way to treat Lisfranc injuries, 16 all of the reported cases were high-energy injury related with more than one column involved. Vosbikian et al 17 . reported a series of low-energy Lisfranc injuries with Lisfranc ligament disruption confirmed by MRI in 38 patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Undisplaced subtle ligamentous Lisfranc injuries, conservative or surgical treatment with percutaneous position screws?

Ren

et al. 2019

Chinese Journal of Traumatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Undisplaced subtle ligamentous Lisfranc injuries are easy to miss or underestimate, and many cases are treated without surgical fixation. It has not yet widely known whether conservative treatment for undisplaced subtle ligamentous Lisfranc injuries may lead to a poor outcome. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of conservative versus surgical management (percutaneous position screw) of undisplaced subtle ligamentous Lisfranc injury. Methods We analysed 61 cases in this retrospective study, including 38 males and 23 females. Forty-one patients were managed conservatively, while 20 patients received surgical treatment involving minimal invasive percutaneous position screw. American orthopaedic foot &ankle society (AOFAS), foot function index (FFI, including FFI disability, FFI pain score and activity limitation scale) scores, Maryland foot score and short form-36 (SF-36) were recorded and compared after a follow-up of 10–16 months (average 12.3). Results Patients in the surgical management group had higher scores in all evaluation methods ( p < 0.05). The complications in the conservative management group had higher incidence, mainly including secondary diastasis (34.1% vs. 5.0%), joint stiffness after 3 months (82.9% vs. 0%), and secondary arthrodesis (12.2% vs. 0%). The highest rate of complication in surgical management group was temporary forefoot pain (55.0%). Conclusion The results of this study suggest that the outcomes of the surgical management with percutaneous position screw fixation are better than the conservative management to treat undisplaced subtle ligamentous Lisfranc injuries. This study can serve as a resource for orthopaedic surgeons in recognizing and managing such injuries.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Undisplaced subtle ligamentous Lisfranc injuries, conservative or surgical treatment with percutaneous position screws?

Ren

et al. 2019

Chinese Journal of Traumatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Treatment of Lisfranc injuries can range from observation and nonoperative management, closed reduction and percutaneous pinning, ORIF, and PA in select circumstances. 1,12,16,24 There have been many studies analyzing differences in outcomes pertaining to management of these injuries. It has been found that worse outcomes are associated with more severe injuries.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This score has been validated in numerous and varying patient cohorts. 4,10 Though the treatment of Lisfranc injuries is variable and includes but is not limited to closed reduction and percutaneous pinning, open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), and primary arthrodesis (PA), 1,12,16,24 the purpose of this study was to present long-term PROMIS-PF and VAS-FA scores in patients with Lisfranc injuries after ORIF. We hypothesized that following surgically treated Lisfranc injury, long-term patient-reported outcomes will represent a significant decrease in physical function as well as increased pain.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term Follow-up of Lisfranc Injuries Treated With Open Reduction Internal Fixation Patient-Reported Outcomes

Walley

Semaan

Shah

et al. 2021

Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: There remains a paucity of data regarding long-term patient-reported outcomes following Lisfranc injuries. We sought to collect long-term clinical outcome data following Lisfranc injuries using PROMIS Physical Function (PROMIS-PF) and visual analog scale–foot and ankle (VAS-FA). Methods: A chart review was performed to identify all patients who had surgical treatment of an acute Lisfranc injury at our institution from 2005 to 2014. Of the 45 patients identified, we were able to recruit 19 for a follow-up clinic visit consisting of physical examination, administration of questionnaires addressing pain and medication usage, radiographs, and completion of outcome surveys including PROMIS-Physical Function and visual analog scale–foot and ankle. Results: There were 14 female and 5 male patients enrolled in the study with a mean time of 6.25 years from the time of injury. Within this cohort, the mean PROMIS-PF score was 52.4±8.2 and the mean VAS–foot and ankle score was 76.6±22.3. Conclusion: We report satisfactory long-term patient-reported outcomes using PROMIS-PF and VAS-FA. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

show abstract

“…Apart from the 4 studies which they were analysed, it is important to mention three more studies relevant to the subject of this review (Table 1), which they were not included to meta analysis for minor reasons, such as different outcome score, type of injury not clearly defined, or not applicable follow up time etc. Vosbikian et al 16 studied 31 patients who sustained a low energy lisfranc injury, treated with a closed reduction and percutaneous fixation using a 4,0 mm fully threaded solid or cannulated screw. Average follow up time was 66 months and the average foot and ankle ability measure (FAAM) for activities of daily living (ADL) and FAAM for sport's activities was 94,2 and 90,4 respectively.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Percutaneous fixation of Lisfranc joint injuries: A systematic review of the literature

Stavrakakis¹,

Magarakis²,

Christoforakis³

2019

Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThe aim of this systematic review was to present the outcome of Lisfranc joint injuries treated with closed reduction and screw percutaneous fixation.MethodsWe searched in Pubmed and Google Scholar Databases for articles regarding screw percutaneous fixation of Lisfranc injuries. Seven studies in total were found to be compatible to our search, according to PRISMA guidelines. Four of those met the criteria of the review and they were included in the meta-analysis. A total number of 106 patients were separated into five groups according to the type of injury and the mean AOFAS score of each group was calculated. Cases in which percutaneous fixation was converted to open treatment due to poor reduction were not included in the study. In addition we compared the outcome score between types of injury according to Myerson classification as well as between purely ligamentous and osseoligamentous injuries. The characteristics of all seven selected studies, such as kind of screw used for fixation, post operative protocol, complications and outcome are mentioned as well.ResultsAverage AOFAS score was 86,2 for type A, 87,54 for type B, and 85 for type C injuries respectively. In pure dislocation group the average AOFAS score was 86,43 and in fracture dislocation group was 87,36. Good to excellent outcome can be expected in patients with different types of injury according to Myerson classification following percutaneous fixation of lisfranc joint injury. Patients with type B injury or a fracture dislocation injury might have better outcome, although this difference was not found to be statistically significant.ConclusionPercutaneous fixation of tarsometatarsal joint injuries is a relatively simple and safe method of treatment, leading to a good functional outcome, especially for Myerson type B as well as for fracture dislocation type of injuries, provided that an anatomical reduction has been achieved.Level of EvidenceLevel III, Therapeutic Study.

show abstract

Outcomes After Percutaneous Reduction and Fixation of Low-Energy Lisfranc Injuries

Abstract: Level IV, retrospective case series.

Cited by 29 publications

References 25 publications

Undisplaced subtle ligamentous Lisfranc injuries, conservative or surgical treatment with percutaneous position screws?

Undisplaced subtle ligamentous Lisfranc injuries, conservative or surgical treatment with percutaneous position screws?

Long-term Follow-up of Lisfranc Injuries Treated With Open Reduction Internal Fixation Patient-Reported Outcomes

Percutaneous fixation of Lisfranc joint injuries: A systematic review of the literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About