Primary ankle ligament augmentation versus modified Brostrom-Gould procedure: a 2-year randomized controlled trial

Porter, Mark D; Shadbolt, Bruce; Stuart, Robert C.

doi:10.1111/ans.12837

Cited by 22 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The main outcome measures were Karlsson score, radiographic stability, and complications. Porter et al [ 68 ] compared a MB procedure with an anatomic reconstruction procedure with ligament advanced reinforcement system (LARS). The main outcome measures of Porter et al [ 68 ] were FAOS and complications.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Generation of the allocation sequence was considered of low risk of bias in six trials [ 63 – 68 ] and unclear risk in Rosenbaum et al [ 69 ], the allocation of which was stratified randomized but no further details provided. Comparability of the groups was good and well described in three studies [ 64 , 66 , 69 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Larsen [ 67 ], it was well described that radiographic evaluation at the follow-up was blinded; none of the other studies provided information about blinding. We acknowledge blinding can be difficult in the comparison of ligament reconstruction and ligament repairment due to the additional operation incision in Evans/CS/LARS procedure, and thus, Hennrikus et al [ 65 ], Porter et al [ 68 ], and Rosenbaum et al [ 69 ] were judged at being at high risk of both performance and detection bias.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In three studies [ 66 , 68 , 69 ], there were no participants lost to follow-up. In Hennrikus et al [ 65 ], it was unclear if there were participants lost to follow-up.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three studies [ 63 , 64 , 69 ] reported clearly specified outcome measures. We rated the other four studies [ 65 – 68 ] as at high risk of selective reporting bias due to lack of definition of the outcome measures collected in the methods section.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Surgical management of chronic lateral ankle instability: a meta-analysis

Cao¹,

Yuan²,

Xu³

et al. 2018

J Orthop Surg Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundA key point to surgical treatment of chronic lateral ankle instability is choosing a suitable surgical procedure. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare different surgical techniques for management of chronic lateral ankle instability.MethodsWe searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, and EMBASE. All identified randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials of operative treatment for chronic lateral ankle instability were included. Two review authors independently extracted data from each study and assessed risk of bias. Where appropriate, results of comparable studies were pooled.ResultsSeven randomized controlled trials were included for analysis. They fell in five clearly distinct groups.One study comparing two different kinds of non-anatomic reconstruction procedures (dynamic and static tenodesis) found two clinical outcomes favoring static tenodesis: better clinical satisfaction and fewer subsequent sprains.Two studies compared non-anatomic reconstruction versus anatomic repairment. In one study, nerve damage was more frequent in non-anatomic reconstruction group; the other one reported that radiological measurement of ankle laxity showed that non-anatomic reconstruction provided higher reduction of talar tilt angle.Two studies comparing two anatomic repairment surgical techniques (transosseous suture versus imbrication) showed no significant difference in any clinical outcome at the follow-up except operation time.One study compared two different anatomic repairment techniques. They found that the double anchor technique was superior with respect to the reduction of talar tilt than single anchor technique.One study compared an anatomic reconstruction procedure with a modified Brostrom technique. Primary reconstruction combined with ligament advanced reinforcement system results in better patient-scored clinical outcome, at 2 years post-surgery, than the modified Brostrom procedure.ConclusionsThere is limited evidence to support any one surgical technique over another surgical technique for chronic lateral ankle instability, but based on the evidence, we could still get some conclusions: (1) There are limitations to the use of dynamic tenodesis, which obtained poor clinical satisfaction and more subsequent sprains. (2) Non-anatomic reconstruction abnormally increased inversion stiffness at the subtalar level as compare with anatomic repairment. (3) Multiple types of modified Brostrom procedures could acquire good clinical results. (4) Anatomic reconstruction is a better procedure for some specific patients.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13018-018-0870-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In three studies [ 66 , 68 , 69 ], there were no participants lost to follow-up. In Hennrikus et al [ 65 ], it was unclear if there were participants lost to follow-up.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%