Dynamic Fixation vs Static Screw Fixation for Syndesmosis Injuries in Pronation External Rotation Ankle Fractures

Category: Trauma; Ankle Introduction/Purpose: The current standard treatment for ankle syndesmosis injury is static screw fixation. Dynamic fixation was developed to restore the dynamic function of the syndesmosis. The purpose of this study was to determine that which of static screw fixation and dy...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Hyunseong Kang MD, PhD, Chaemoon Lim MD, Sungwook Choi MD, PhD
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2024-12-01
Series:Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/2473011424S00258
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850132497205035008
author Hyunseong Kang MD, PhD
Chaemoon Lim MD
Sungwook Choi MD, PhD
author_facet Hyunseong Kang MD, PhD
Chaemoon Lim MD
Sungwook Choi MD, PhD
author_sort Hyunseong Kang MD, PhD
collection DOAJ
description Category: Trauma; Ankle Introduction/Purpose: The current standard treatment for ankle syndesmosis injury is static screw fixation. Dynamic fixation was developed to restore the dynamic function of the syndesmosis. The purpose of this study was to determine that which of static screw fixation and dynamic fixation is better for treatment of ankle syndesmosis injury in pronation external rotation fractures. Methods: 30 patients were treated with dynamic fixation (DF group) and 28 patients with static screw fixation (SF group). The primary outcome was Olerud–Molander Ankle Outcome Score. The secondary outcome were Visual Analogue Scale score and American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society score, radiographic outcomes, complications and cost effectiveness. To evaluate the radiographic outcome, the tibiofibular clear space, tibiofibular overlap, and medial clear space were compared using the pre-operative and last follow-up plain radiographs. To evaluate the cost effectiveness, the total hospital cost was compared between the two groups. Results: There was no significant difference in primary outcome. Moreover, there were no significant difference in secondary outcome, including Visual Analogue Scale score and American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society score and radiographic outcome. Two cases of reduction loss and four cases of screw breakage were observed in the SF group. No complication in the DF group was observed. Dynamic fixation was more cost effective than static screw fixation with respect to the total hospital cost Conclusion: Although dynamic fixation provided similar clinical and radiologic outcome, dynamic fixation is more cost effective with fewer complications than static screw fixation in ankle syndesmosis injury of pronation-external rotation fractures.
format Article
id doaj-art-91dd8d0ef06f478482a92b9efeda6ea3
institution OA Journals
issn 2473-0114
language English
publishDate 2024-12-01
publisher SAGE Publishing
record_format Article
series Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics
spelling doaj-art-91dd8d0ef06f478482a92b9efeda6ea32025-08-20T02:32:11ZengSAGE PublishingFoot & Ankle Orthopaedics2473-01142024-12-01910.1177/2473011424S00258Dynamic Fixation vs Static Screw Fixation for Syndesmosis Injuries in Pronation External Rotation Ankle FracturesHyunseong Kang MD, PhDChaemoon Lim MDSungwook Choi MD, PhDCategory: Trauma; Ankle Introduction/Purpose: The current standard treatment for ankle syndesmosis injury is static screw fixation. Dynamic fixation was developed to restore the dynamic function of the syndesmosis. The purpose of this study was to determine that which of static screw fixation and dynamic fixation is better for treatment of ankle syndesmosis injury in pronation external rotation fractures. Methods: 30 patients were treated with dynamic fixation (DF group) and 28 patients with static screw fixation (SF group). The primary outcome was Olerud–Molander Ankle Outcome Score. The secondary outcome were Visual Analogue Scale score and American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society score, radiographic outcomes, complications and cost effectiveness. To evaluate the radiographic outcome, the tibiofibular clear space, tibiofibular overlap, and medial clear space were compared using the pre-operative and last follow-up plain radiographs. To evaluate the cost effectiveness, the total hospital cost was compared between the two groups. Results: There was no significant difference in primary outcome. Moreover, there were no significant difference in secondary outcome, including Visual Analogue Scale score and American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society score and radiographic outcome. Two cases of reduction loss and four cases of screw breakage were observed in the SF group. No complication in the DF group was observed. Dynamic fixation was more cost effective than static screw fixation with respect to the total hospital cost Conclusion: Although dynamic fixation provided similar clinical and radiologic outcome, dynamic fixation is more cost effective with fewer complications than static screw fixation in ankle syndesmosis injury of pronation-external rotation fractures.https://doi.org/10.1177/2473011424S00258
spellingShingle Hyunseong Kang MD, PhD
Chaemoon Lim MD
Sungwook Choi MD, PhD
Dynamic Fixation vs Static Screw Fixation for Syndesmosis Injuries in Pronation External Rotation Ankle Fractures
Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics
title Dynamic Fixation vs Static Screw Fixation for Syndesmosis Injuries in Pronation External Rotation Ankle Fractures
title_full Dynamic Fixation vs Static Screw Fixation for Syndesmosis Injuries in Pronation External Rotation Ankle Fractures
title_fullStr Dynamic Fixation vs Static Screw Fixation for Syndesmosis Injuries in Pronation External Rotation Ankle Fractures
title_full_unstemmed Dynamic Fixation vs Static Screw Fixation for Syndesmosis Injuries in Pronation External Rotation Ankle Fractures
title_short Dynamic Fixation vs Static Screw Fixation for Syndesmosis Injuries in Pronation External Rotation Ankle Fractures
title_sort dynamic fixation vs static screw fixation for syndesmosis injuries in pronation external rotation ankle fractures
url https://doi.org/10.1177/2473011424S00258
work_keys_str_mv AT hyunseongkangmdphd dynamicfixationvsstaticscrewfixationforsyndesmosisinjuriesinpronationexternalrotationanklefractures
AT chaemoonlimmd dynamicfixationvsstaticscrewfixationforsyndesmosisinjuriesinpronationexternalrotationanklefractures
AT sungwookchoimdphd dynamicfixationvsstaticscrewfixationforsyndesmosisinjuriesinpronationexternalrotationanklefractures