MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1177/10711007241288853

Медицинская библиотека · Foot & ankle international · 2024

Functional Outcome and Patient Satisfaction After Primary vs Secondary Arthrodesis for Lisfranc Injuries: Toward a Single-Surgery Approach.

Wilhelmina Maria Engelmann Esmee, Halm Jens Anthony, Schepers Tim

СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

The choice between primary arthrodesis (PA) and open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) for acute Lisfranc injuries remains contentious. Apart from primary treatment, arthrodesis is often used for treating chronic Lisfranc injuries, including patients in whom initial ORIF or nonoperative treatment failed. The aim of this study was to compare PA and secondary arthrodesis (SA) in terms of complications and functional outcome.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted on trauma patients with Lisfranc injuries treated at a level 1 trauma center between July 1, 2010, and July 1, 2020. Selected patients were evaluated at the outpatient clinic and received a survey. Demographics, injury characteristics, management, complications, and patient-reported outcomes (American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society midfoot score, Foot Function Index) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine of 37 potential patients (78.4%; PA n = 11, SA n = 18) completed the survey with a median follow-up of 7.1 (PA) to 9.3 (SA) years (P = .01). The majority were female (n = 18, 62.1%); the mean age of PA patients was 57.1 years (SD 14.2) compared with 43.5 years (SD 17.1) in SA patients (P = .04). In the PA group, there was no infection, 100% union, and implants were removed in 5 of 11 patients. In the SA group, 11.1% (n = 2) developed infection, malunion rate was 11.1%, implants were removed in 33.3% (n = 6), and 22.2% required revision surgery. AOFAS was "good" in PA (77.7, SD 17.3) compared with rated "fair" in SA (67.1, SD 21.3, P = .19). FFI was better in PA (26.0, SD 26.2) than SA (37.6, SD 30.8, P = .32), which exceeded the minimally important clinical difference.

CONCLUSION

Although this study was limited by sample size, the overall results suggest equivalent functional outcome, pain and treatment satisfaction in primary arthrodesis compared with secondary arthrodesis patients for treatment of Lisfranc injury.

Для цитирования: Wilhelmina Maria Engelmann Esmee, Halm Jens Anthony, Schepers Tim. Functional Outcome and Patient Satisfaction After Primary vs Secondary Arthrodesis for Lisfranc Injuries: Toward a Single-Surgery Approach.. Foot & ankle international. 2024. DOI: 10.1177/10711007241288853.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.