We have located links that may give you full text access.
Dynamic Fixation versus Static Screw Fixation for Syndesmosis Injuries in Pronation External Rotation Ankle Fractures: A Retrospective Case Control Study.
Malaysian Orthopaedic Journal 2023 November
INTRODUCTION: 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.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty 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.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty 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.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System: From History to Practice of a Secular Topic.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 5
Albumin: a comprehensive review and practical guideline for clinical use.European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2024 April 13
Revascularization Strategy in Myocardial Infarction with Multivessel Disease.Journal of Clinical Medicine 2024 March 27
Clinical practice guidelines on the management of status epilepticus in adults: A systematic review.Epilepsia 2024 April 13
Interstitial Lung Disease: A Review.JAMA 2024 April 23
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app