Fracture Dislocation of Ankle Joint Clinical Trial
— ARTOfficial title:
A Prospective Randomized Pilot Study to Compare Open Versus Percutaneous Syndesmosis Repair of Unstable Ankle Fractures
Verified date | February 2019 |
Source | Lawson Health Research Institute |
Contact | n/a |
Is FDA regulated | No |
Health authority | |
Study type | Interventional |
This study evaluates fracture healing, anatomic reduction and return to functioning in patients with unstable Weber C type fractures of the ankle. Best outcomes are obtained when a good alignment of the ankle joint is maintained and natural function of the syndesmosis (space between the tibia and fibula bones) is restored. The syndesmosis and ankle joint is stabilized by a series of ligaments which are often damaged in Weber C type fractures. Current syndesmosis repair techniques traverse the tibia and fibula, but do not anatomically reconstruct the ligaments. The investigators will compare reconstruction of the unstable syndesmosis by open reduction and internal fixation using a syndesmosis screw coupled with anterior ligament (AiTFL) anatomic repair technique (ART) to percutaneous repair using a syndemosis screw only (SCREW). Radiographic, pain and functional outcome scores will be compared between the groups using validated outcome measures.
Status | Active, not recruiting |
Enrollment | 50 |
Est. completion date | June 2020 |
Est. primary completion date | September 2016 |
Accepts healthy volunteers | No |
Gender | All |
Age group | 18 Years and older |
Eligibility |
Inclusion Criteria: 1. The subject is 18 years old or greater with a pre-operative diagnosis of a Weber C ankle fracture (supination-external rotation, pronation-external rotation, pronation-abduction patterns). 2. The subject demonstrates lateral subluxation of the talus on x-ray or stress views (unstability). 3. The lateral malleolus fracture if present begins at least 1.0 cm proximal to the syndesmosis. 4. The subject has no history of previous ankle injury. 5. The subject does not have an ipsilateral lower extremity injury that would impede results. 6. The subject has no neuromuscular or neurosensory deficiency that would limit the ability to assess the operative procedure. Exclusion Criteria: 1. The subject has a lateral malleolus fracture that begins less than 1.0 cm proximal to the syndesmosis. 2. The subject has an open ankle fracture with a lateral wound. - |
Country | Name | City | State |
---|---|---|---|
Canada | London Health Sciences Centre | London | Ontario |
Lead Sponsor | Collaborator |
---|---|
Lawson Health Research Institute |
Canada,
Bauer M, Jonsson K, Nilsson B. Thirty-year follow-up of ankle fractures. Acta Orthop Scand. 1985 Apr;56(2):103-6. — View Citation
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 Dec;71(10):1548-55. — View Citation
Coetzee JC, Ebeling P. Treatment of syndesmosis disruptions with TightRope Fixation. Tech Foot Ankle Surg. 7(3):196-202, 2008.
Ebraheim NA, Mekhail AO, Gargasz SS. Ankle fractures involving the fibula proximal to the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis. Foot Ankle Int. 1997 Aug;18(8):513-21. Review. — View Citation
Forsythe K, Freedman KB, Stover MD, Patwardhan AG. Comparison of a novel FiberWire-button construct versus metallic screw fixation in a syndesmotic injury model. Foot Ankle Int. 2008 Jan;29(1):49-54. doi: 10.3113/FAI.2008.0049. — View Citation
Gardner MJ, Brodsky A, Briggs SM, Nielson JH, Lorich DG. Fixation of posterior malleolar fractures provides greater syndesmotic stability. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006 Jun;447:165-71. — View Citation
Gardner MJ, Demetrakopoulos D, Briggs SM, Helfet DL, Lorich DG. Malreduction of the tibiofibular syndesmosis in ankle fractures. Foot Ankle Int. 2006 Oct;27(10):788-92. — View Citation
Harris IA, Jones HP. The fate of the syndesmosis in type C ankle fractures: a cadaveric study. Injury. 1997 May;28(4):275-7. — View Citation
Klitzman R, Zhao H, Zhang LQ, Strohmeyer G, Vora A. Suture-button versus screw fixation of the syndesmosis: a biomechanical analysis. Foot Ankle Int. 2010 Jan;31(1):69-75. doi: 10.3113/FAI.2010.0069. — View Citation
Leeds HC, Ehrlich MG. Instability of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis after bimalleolar and trimalleolar ankle fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1984 Apr;66(4):490-503. — View Citation
Michelson J.D. Current concepts review: Fractures about the ankle. J Bone Joint Surg. 77A, 142-152, 1995.
Miller AN, Carroll EA, Parker RJ, Boraiah S, Helfet DL, Lorich DG. Direct visualization for syndesmotic stabilization of ankle fractures. Foot Ankle Int. 2009 May;30(5):419-26. doi: 10.3113/FAI.2009.0419. — View Citation
Miller AN, Carroll EA, Parker RJ, Helfet DL, Lorich DG. Posterior malleolar stabilization of syndesmotic injuries is equivalent to screw fixation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010 Apr;468(4):1129-35. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-1111-4. Epub 2009 Oct 2. — View Citation
Miller RS, Weinhold PS, Dahners LE. Comparison of tricortical screw fixation versus a modified suture construct for fixation of ankle syndesmosis injury: a biomechanical study. J Orthop Trauma. 1999 Jan;13(1):39-42. — View Citation
Ogilvie-Harris DJ, Reed SC, Hedman TP. Disruption of the ankle syndesmosis: biomechanical study of the ligamentous restraints. Arthroscopy. 1994 Oct;10(5):558-60. — View Citation
Parfenchuck TA, Frix JM, Bertrand SL, Corpe RS. Clinical use of a syndesmosis screw in stage IV pronation-external rotation ankle fractures. Orthop Rev. 1994 Aug;Suppl:23-8. — View Citation
Pelton K, Thordarson DB, Barnwell J. Open versus closed treatment of the fibula in Maissoneuve injuries. Foot Ankle Int. 2010 Jul;31(7):604-8. doi: 10.3113/FAI.2010.0604. — View Citation
Phillips WA, Schwartz HS, Keller CS, Woodward HR, Rudd WS, Spiegel PG, Laros GS. A prospective, randomized study of the management of severe ankle fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1985 Jan;67(1):67-78. — View Citation
Ramsey PL, Hamilton W. Changes in tibiotalar area of contact caused by lateral talar shift. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1976 Apr;58(3):356-7. — View Citation
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 Apr;30(4):346-52. doi: 10.3113/FAI.2009.0346. — View Citation
Solari J, Benjamin J, Wilson J, Lee R, Pitt M. Ankle mortise stability in Weber C fractures: indications for syndesmotic fixation. J Orthop Trauma. 1991;5(2):190-5. — View Citation
Yamaguchi K, Martin CH, Boden SD, Labropoulos PA. Operative treatment of syndesmotic disruptions without use of a syndesmotic screw: a prospective clinical study. Foot Ankle Int. 1994 Aug;15(8):407-14. — View Citation
* Note: There are 22 references in all — Click here to view all references
Type | Measure | Description | Time frame | Safety issue |
---|---|---|---|---|
Primary | CT scan | assessment of ankle alignment | 3 month | |
Secondary | Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAO), | Functional outcome assessment | 6 weeks, 3 , 6 , 12 months | |
Secondary | AOFAS Hindfoot Score | Functional outcome assessment | 6 weeks, 3 , 6 , 12 months | |
Secondary | Maryland Foot Score | Functional outcome assessment | 6 weeks, 3 , 6 , 12 months | |
Secondary | Radiographic healing | xray | 6 weeks, 3 , 6 , 12 months | |
Secondary | Complication- Infection | clinical and xray review of fracture documented | 6 weeks, 3 , 6 , 12 months | |
Secondary | Complication-Implant Failure | clinical and xray review of fracture documented | 6 weeks, 3 , 6 , 12 months |