Ankle Fractures Clinical Trial
Official title:
Operative Treatment of Complex Ankle Fractures: Comparison of the Results With and Without Ankle Arthroscopy-a Randomized Controlled Trial
Background: An anatomical reconstruction of ankle congruity is an important prerequisite in
the operative treatment of acute ankle fractures. But, despite an anatomic reduction,
patients suffer from residual problems like chronic pain, stiffness, persistent swelling and
instability after these fractures. There is growing evidence, that this poor outcome is
related to the concomitant traumatic intraarticular pathology. Therefore, supplementary
ankle arthroscopy has been proposed in acute ankle fractures as it is a valuable tool to
confirm the anatomic reposition and to further identify and manage associated intraarticular
injuries. The arthroscopic treatment of these pathologies might result in a better outcome
after complex ankle fractures. Nevertheless, until now, the vast majority of ankle fractures
are managed by open procedures only. Still, indications for arthroscopically assisted open
reduction and internal fixation (AORIF) are not clearly stated, and the effectiveness of
AORIF compared with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) has not yet been determined
for complex ankle fractures. In this context, only a prospective randomized study can
sufficiently answer these open questions. Therefore, the investigators plan a randomized
controlled trial intended to report the short-, midterm- and long-term follow-up of patients
who underwent operative treatment of acute ankle fractures - with and without ankle
arthroscopy.
Methods/Study design: The investigators will perform a randomized controlled trial
evaluating the effect of AORIF compared to ORIF with a sample size of 40 patients per group.
The investigators include patients with an acute ankle fracture after written informed
consent. Primary outcome of the investigators' study is the difference of the AOFAS score
(American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society) between the intervention (AORIF) and comparison
(ORIF) group after a follow-up of 2 years. Several secondary outcome parameters will be
assessed as well. Statistical analysis will be performed using a two-sided Student`s t-test.
Discussion: Until today, there are only two randomized controlled trials evaluating the
effect of open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) compared to arthroscopically assisted
open reduction and internal fixation (AORIF). Both studies only included patients with
isolated fractures of the distal fibula at the level of the syndesmosis. These are the most
simple fractures that are regularly treated operatively. Both studies documented a high
incidence of intraarticular disorders in the AORIF group, but only one could show
significant better results in the AORIF group. Moreover, several other studies could
consistently demonstrate that the intraarticular damage is even more pronounced the more
complex the fracture is. Consequently, a more distinctive effect of arthroscopy in complex
fractures involving two malleoli or more has to be assumed when compared to these simple
fractures.
Acute ankle fractures are one of the leading pathologies disturbing ankle congruence. These
fractures are extremely common with an incidence of 0.1-0.2% per year. The treatment of
acute ankle fractures is determined by the classification of the injury based on
radiographic findings. Operative treatment performing open reduction and internal fixation
(ORIF) is the standard of care for unstable or dislocated ankle fractures. Anatomical
realignment of the joint and restoration of ankle stability are the main goals of the
operative treatment. Over the last decades the improved functional outcome has emphasized
the importance of anatomic reconstruction. Nevertheless, successful anatomical reduction
does not automatically lead to favorable clinical outcome. According to several studies, the
mid- and long-term outcome following operative treatment of acute ankle fractures is often
poor even though anatomical reconstruction of the joint has been achieved. Residual problems
after acute ankle fractures include chronic pain, stiffness, recurrent swelling and
instability. These problems occur despite the operative restoration of ankle congruence.
There is growing evidence that the poor outcome might be mostly related to occult articular
injuries involving cartilage and soft tissue damage. These intraarticular disorders have
been shown to negatively affect the clinical results, but it is difficult to diagnose these
intraarticular pathologies by physical examination, standard radiography or even CT-scans.
In this context, many authors have well documented the value of ankle arthroscopy. Ankle
arthroscopy is a standard minimally invasive technique that allows direct visualization of
intraarticular structures without arthrotomy or malleolar osteotomy. In the last decades, it
has become a safe and effective diagnostic and therapeutic procedure. In acute ankle
fractures, arthroscopically assisted open reduction and internal fixation (AORIF) allows
careful examination of the chondral aspects as well as the capsular and intraarticular
ligaments. If necessary, the traumatic intraarticular pathologies can directly be addressed
by removing loose bodies and ruptured ligaments extending into the joint, performing
chondroplasty or micro fracturing if necessary. Furthermore, it allows a confirmation of the
anatomic reduction without having any evidence that a supplementary ankle arthroscopy in
acute ankle fracture treatment leads to a higher complication rate.
Until today, there are only two randomized controlled trials evaluating the effect of
additional ankle arthroscopy. Both studies available comparing ORIF to AORIF included only
patients with isolated fractures of the distal fibula at the level of the syndesmosis only.
These are the most simple fractures that are regularly treated operatively. Thodarson et al.
compared ORIF treatment of distal fibula fractures supplemented with or without ankle
arthroscopy and found that 8 of 9 patients had articular damage to the talar dome in the
arthroscopy group. Only minimal arthroscopic treatment was required and no outcome
differences were noted after a mean follow-up of 21 months. Takao et al. documented an
osteochondral lesion (OCL) in 74% in the arthroscopic group. In their study, the mean AOFAS
score was significantly better when patients were treated arthroscopically. Moreover,
several studies could consistently document, that the intraarticular damage is more
pronounced the more complex the fracture is. Consequently, one must assume a more
distinctive effect of arthroscopy in more complex fractures involving two malleoli or more -
when compared to simple fractures.
Nevertheless, until now, the vast majority of ankle fractures are managed by open procedures
only. Still, indications for AORIF are not clearly stated, and the effectiveness of AORIF
compared with ORIF has not yet been determined for complex ankle fractures where the
investigators would expect even better results as intraarticular lesions are more common in
these fracture types. Moreover, the prognostic importance of traumatic articular lesions
still remains unclear, although several studies suggest such injuries may be the source of
functional deficits. Nevertheless, this concept seems to be intuitively comprehensible. In
this context, only a prospective randomized study can sufficiently answer these open
questions. Therefore, the investigators plan a randomized controlled trial intended to
report the short-, midterm- and long-term follow-up of patients who underwent operative
treatment of acute ankle fractures (AO A2, A3, B2, B3, C1-C3) - with and without ankle
arthroscopy.
;
Allocation: Randomized, Endpoint Classification: Efficacy Study, Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment, Masking: Open Label, Primary Purpose: Treatment
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Recruiting |
NCT05555459 -
Performance and Safety Evaluation of Inion CompressOn Screw in Foot and Ankle Surgeries. PMCF Investigation
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT04235907 -
Telerehabilitation Following Ankle Fractures
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT02949674 -
Ropivacaine Versus Bupivacaine as Preemptive Analgesia in Surgical Site in Ankle Fracture Patients
|
Phase 3 | |
Completed |
NCT02198768 -
Ankle Fracture vs Ankle Fracture-Dislocation
|
||
Recruiting |
NCT05916300 -
Diagnostic Ultrasonography in Physiotherapy
|
||
Recruiting |
NCT04674046 -
Deep Deltoid Ligament Integrity in Weber B Ankle Fractures - Mini-invasive Arthroscopic Evaluation.
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT03696199 -
Randomized Controlled Trial for Ankle Fracture Pain Control
|
Phase 4 | |
Recruiting |
NCT03259204 -
Swedish Multicenter Trial of Outpatient Prevention of Leg Clots
|
N/A | |
Not yet recruiting |
NCT03625154 -
Operative Versus Non Operative Management Outcomes of Isolated Lateral Malleolar Weber B Ankle Fractures
|
N/A | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT03769909 -
Prevention of Posttraumatic Osteoarthritis After Acute Intraarticular Fractures
|
||
Recruiting |
NCT05280639 -
Simplified Post Op Rehabilitation for Ankle and Pilon Fractures
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT02967172 -
Efficacy of Multimodal Periarticular Injections in Operatively Treated Ankle Fractures
|
Phase 4 | |
Withdrawn |
NCT04768478 -
CBD for Pain Reduction and Opioid Use After Ankle and Tibia Fracture ORIF
|
Phase 4 | |
Completed |
NCT05084794 -
The Results of Middle-sized Posterior Malleolus Fractures: Fixed Versus Non-fixed
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT03741556 -
Prognostic Factors Following Ankle Fractures
|
||
Active, not recruiting |
NCT02481076 -
Compression in Anklefracture Treatment, The CAT-study
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05729542 -
Comparing Clinical Outcomes of Suture Button Versus Fibulink Fixation for Acute Ankle Syndesmosis Injuries
|
N/A | |
Not yet recruiting |
NCT06086223 -
Functional Outcomes Following Ankle Fracture Fixation With or Without Ankle Arthroscopy
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05389436 -
Outpatient Versus Inpatient Surgery for Ankle Fractures
|
N/A | |
Not yet recruiting |
NCT06329752 -
Sciatic Nerve Block for Ankle and Leg Fracture Manipulation in the Emergency Department
|
N/A |