Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2022; 57(03): 496-501
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1740293
Artigo Original

Treatment of Distal Tibiofibular Syndesmosis Injury Associated with Ankle Fractures with Suture Button

Article in several languages: português | English
Adilson Sanches de Oliveira Junior 
1   Departamento de Cirurgia Ortopédica, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brasil
,
Beatriz D'Andrea Pigossi 
2   Faculdade de Ciências Médicas e da Saúde, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, Sorocaba, SP, Brasil
,
Guilherme Honda Saito 
1   Departamento de Cirurgia Ortopédica, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brasil
,
Danilo Ryuko Cândido Nishikawa 
3   Departamento de Cirurgia Ortopédica, Hospital Alemão Oswaldo Cruz, São Paulo, SP, Brasil
,
Alberto Abussamra Moreira Mendes 
1   Departamento de Cirurgia Ortopédica, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brasil
,
Marcelo Pires Prado 
1   Departamento de Cirurgia Ortopédica, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brasil
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the results obtained from the surgical treatment of malleolar ankle fractures associated with distal tibiofibular syndesmosis (DTFS) injury submitted to conventional surgical procedure for fracture fixation and DTFS fixation by suture button (SB).

Methods Forty-nine patients were retrospectively evaluated, with a mean age of 45 years old and a mean follow-up of 34.1 months. Clinical and functional evaluation was based on the visual analogue scale (VAS) and on the American Foot and Ankle Society Score (AOFAS) for ankle and hindfoot, return to routine activities, and return to sport.

Results The postoperative mean AOFAS and VAS were, respectively, 97.06 (confidence interval [CI 95%: 95.31–98.81] and 0.16 [CI 95% 0,04 – 0,29]. All patients returned to previous daily activities, and only 12 showed some residual symptom. There was no postoperative instability in any patient. Forty-six patients returned to sports activities and, of these, only 1 did not return to the level prior to the injury. Only two patients presented SB-related alterations. There was no report of dissatisfaction.

Conclusion In malleolar fractures of the ankle with DTFS injury, the fixation of syndesmosis with SB demonstrated excellent postoperative results.

Level of Evidence IV, retrospective case series.

Keywords

ankle joint - ankle fractures - suture techniques - fracture fixation, internal

Financial Support

No financial support. All costs for the collection, analysis, interpretation of the results, and writing of the article were provided exclusively by the authors.


Work developed at the Departamento de cirurgia ortopédica, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.




Publication History

Received: 13 April 2021

Accepted: 20 September 2021

Article published online:
20 December 2021

© 2021. Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • Referências

  • 1 Boden SD, Labropoulos PA, McCowin P, Lestini WF, Hurwitz SR. Mechanical considerations for the syndesmosis screw. A cadaver study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1989; 71 (10) 1548-1555
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Soin SP, Knight TA, Dinah AF, Mears SC, Swierstra BA, Belkoff SM. Suture-button versus screw fixation in a syndesmosis rupture model: a biomechanical comparison. Foot Ankle Int 2009; 30 (04) 346-352
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Unal MA. Suture Button Fixation for Syndesmosis Injuries: Review of the literature. Clin Res Foot Ankle 2014; 2: 142
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Kim JH, Gwak HC, Lee CR, Choo HJ, Kim JG, Kim DY. A Comparison of screw fixation and suture-button fixation in a syndesmosis injury in an ankle fracture. J Foot Ankle Surg 2016; 55 (05) 985-990
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Lin CF, Gross ML, Weinhold P. Ankle syndesmosis injuries: anatomy, biomechanics, mechanism of injury, and clinical guidelines for diagnosis and intervention. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2006; 36 (06) 372-384
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Clarke HJ, Michelson JD, Cox QG, Jinnah RH. Tibio-talar stability in bimalleolar ankle fractures: a dynamic in vitro contact area study. Foot Ankle 1991; 11 (04) 222-227
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Ortiz CA, Wagner P, Wagner E. State-of-the-Art in ankle fracture management in Chile. Foot Ankle Clin 2016; 21 (02) 367-389
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Sman AD, Hiller CE, Refshauge KM. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for diagnosis of ankle syndesmosis injury: a systematic review. Br J Sports Med 2013; 47 (10) 620-628
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Rammelt S, Obruba P. An update on the evaluation and treatment of syndesmotic injuries. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg 2015; 41 (06) 601-614
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Zalavras C, Thordarson D. Ankle syndesmotic injury. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2007; 15 (06) 330-339
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Rigby RB, Cottom JM. Does the Arthrex TightRope® provide maintenance of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis? A 2-year follow-up of 64 TightRopes® in 37 patients. J Foot Ankle Surg 2013; 52 (05) 563-567
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Holmes JR, Acker II WB, Murphy JM, McKinney A, Kadakia AR, Irwin TA. A novel algorithm for isolated Weber B ankle fractures: a retrospective review of 51 Nonsurgically Treated Patients. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2016; 24 (09) 645-652
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Endo J, Yamaguchi S, Saito M, Morikawa T, Akagi R, Sasho T. Changes in the syndesmotic reduction after syndesmotic screw fixation for ankle malleolar fractures: One-year longitudinal evaluations using computer tomography. Injury 2016; 47 (10) 2360-2365
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Kellett JJ, Lovell GA, Eriksen DA, Sampson MJ. Diagnostic imaging of ankle syndesmosis injuries: A general review. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2018; 62 (02) 159-168
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Seitz Jr WH, Bachner EJ, Abram LJ. et al. Repair of the tibiofibular syndesmosis with a flexible implant. J Orthop Trauma 1991; 5 (01) 78-82
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Laflamme M, Belzile EL, Bédard L, van den Bekerom MP, Glazebrook M, Pelet S. A prospective randomized multicenter trial comparing clinical outcomes of patients treated surgically with a static or dynamic implant for acute ankle syndesmosis rupture. J Orthop Trauma 2015; 29 (05) 216-223
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Pirozzi KM, Creech CL, Meyr AJ. Assessment of anatomic risk during syndesmotic stabilization with the suture button technique. J Foot Ankle Surg 2015; 54 (05) 917-919
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Förschner PF, Beitzel K, Imhoff AB. et al. Five-year outcomes after treatment for acute instability of the tibiofibular syndesmosis using a suture-button fixation system. Orthop J Sports Med 2017; 5 (04) 2325967117702854
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Thornes B. Comparison of a novel Fiberwire-button construct versus metallic screw fixation in a syndesmotic injury model. Foot Ankle Int 2008; 29 (04) 465-466 , author reply 465–466
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Naqvi GA, Cunningham P, Lynch B, Galvin R, Awan N. Fixation of ankle syndesmotic injuries: comparison of tightrope fixation and syndesmotic screw fixation for accuracy of syndesmotic reduction. Am J Sports Med 2012; 40 (12) 2828-2835
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Rodrigues R, Masiero D, Mizusaki J. et al. Tradução, adaptação cultural e validação do “American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Scale.”. Acta Ortop Bras 2008; 16 (02) 107-111
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Thornes B, Shannon F, Guiney AM, Hession P, Masterson E. Suture-button syndesmosis fixation: accelerated rehabilitation and improved outcomes. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005; (431) 207-212
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Zhang P, Liang Y, He J, Fang Y, Chen P, Wang J. A systematic review of suture-button versus syndesmotic screw in the treatment of distal tibiofibular syndesmosis injury. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2017; 18 (01) 286
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar