Comparison of Clinical Efficacy between Arthroscopic and Open Surgery for Ogden Type 1-2 Peroneal Tendon Dislocation.

OBJECTIVE: While the incidence of peroneal tendon dislocation (PTD) is relatively low, it is frequently underdiagnosed in clinical practice, and the misdiagnosis or improper treatment of this condition may lead to a decline in patients' quality of life. Currently, the surgical treatment options for PTD mainly include open and arthroscopic surgery. However, in order to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of these two surgical approaches, further comparative research is needed. Therefore, the aim of this study is to investigate the early clinical outcomes of arthroscopic and open surgery in the treatment of Ogden type 1-2 PTD.

METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive analysis of 46 patients diagnosed with PTD who underwent surgery at our institution between January 2017 and January 2023. The patients were divided into two groups: the open surgery group, consisting of 26 cases, and the arthroscopic surgery group, consisting of 20 cases. To compare the effectiveness of the surgical approach, we evaluated several parameters, including the integrity of the superior peroneal retinaculum on MRI images, functional scores, pain interference scores, and ankle eversion muscle strength. These assessments are conducted respectively before the surgery, 1 month after the surgery, 3 months after the surgery, and at the final follow-up for each group of patients (at least 6 months post-surgery). Demographics and intergroup comparisons of the two groups of data were analyzed by t-test or the Mann-Whitney U test. Intragroup comparisons of the two groups of data were analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) or the Kruskal-Wallis test, followed by post hoc multiple comparisons.

RESULTS: In the intragroup comparisons, both the arthroscopic surgery and the open surgery group demonstrated significant improvement in functional scores, pain interference scores, muscle strength, and MRI findings at the final follow-up postoperatively (p < 0.01). However, the open surgery group exhibited significant improvements in these outcomes at the final follow-up, while the arthroscopic surgery group showed significant improvement at 3 months postoperatively. In intergroup comparisons, the arthroscopic surgery group outperformed the open surgery group in functional scores, pain interference scores, and muscle strength 3 months after the surgery, with statistically significant differences (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic surgery offers advantages in early clinical outcomes, such as pain relief, function, and muscle strength improvement. However, over time, both approaches provide similar results regarding effectiveness.