Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine
Erschienen in: Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine 1/2017

18.01.2017 | Foot and Ankle Sports Medicine (M Drakos, section editor)

Current trends in the diagnosis and management of syndesmotic injury

verfasst von: Matthew L. Vopat, Bryan G. Vopat, Bart Lubberts, Christopher W. DiGiovanni

Erschienen in: Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine | Ausgabe 1/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Ideal management of the various presentations of syndesmotic injury remains controversial to this day. High quality evidentiary science on this topic is rare, and numerous existing studies continue to contradict one another. The primary reasons for these discrepancies are that previous studies have failed to (1) properly distinguish between isolated (non-fractured) and non-isolated injuries, (2) accurately define stable from unstable injuries, and (3) sufficiently differentiate between acute and chronic injuries. The purpose of this review is to summarize today’s body of literature regarding diagnosis and management of syndesmotic injury and discuss current trends and important future directions to optimize care of this very heterogeneous population.
Literatur
1.
Vosseller JT, Karl JW, Greisberg JK. Incidence of syndesmotic injury. Orthopedics. 2014;37(3):e226–9.CrossRefPubMed
2.
3.
Switaj PJ, Mendoza M, Kadakia AR. Acute and chronic injuries to the syndesmosis. Clin Sports Med. 2015;34(4):643–77.CrossRefPubMed
4.
• Hunt KJ, et al. High ankle sprains and syndesmotic injuries in athletes. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2015;23(11):661–73.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Mak MF, Gartner L, Pearce CJ. Management of syndesmosis injuries in the elite athlete. Foot Ankle Clin. 2013;18(2):195–214.CrossRefPubMed
6.
McCollum GA, et al. Syndesmosis and deltoid ligament injuries in the athlete. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013;21(6):1328–37.CrossRefPubMed
7.
8.
Symeonidis PD, et al. Common pitfalls in syndesmotic rupture management: a clinical audit. Foot Ankle Int. 2013;34(3):345–50.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Franke J, et al. Intraoperative three-dimensional imaging in the treatment of acute unstable syndesmotic injuries. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(15):1386–90.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Cancienne JM, Crosen MP, Yarboro SR. Use of a hybrid operating room to improve reduction of syndesmotic injuries in ankle fractures: a case report. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2015.
11.
Tucker A, et al. Functional outcomes following syndesmotic fixation: a comparison of screws retained in situ versus routine removal—is it really necessary? Injury. 2013;44(12):1880–4.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Roemer FW, et al. Ligamentous injuries and the risk of associated tissue damage in acute ankle sprains in athletes: a cross-sectional MRI study. Am J Sports Med. 2014;42(7):1549–57.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Gerber JP, et al. Persistent disability associated with ankle sprains: a prospective examination of an athletic population. Foot Ankle Int. 1998;19(10):653–60.CrossRefPubMed
14.
• Lubberts B, van Dijk PAD, Donovan N. Stable and unstable grade II syndesmotic injuries require different treatment strategies and vary in fuctional outcomes: a systematic review. JISAKOS. 2016;1(3):1–6. An in-depth review of current recommendations on how to diagnosis and treat stable and unstable grade II syndesmotic injuries
15.
Osbahr DC, et al. Syndesmosis and lateral ankle sprains in the National Football League. Orthopedics. 2013;36(11):e1378–84.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Hunt KJ, et al. Epidemiology of syndesmosis injuries in intercollegiate football: incidence and risk factors from National Collegiate Athletic Association injury surveillance system data from 2004 to 2005 to 2008-2009. Clin J Sport Med. 2013;23(4):278–82.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Kaplan LD, et al. Incidence and variance of foot and ankle injuries in elite college football players. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2011;40(1):40–4.
18.
Lubberts B, van Dijk PAD, Calder JD, DiGiovanni CW. There is no best surgical treatment for chronic isolated syndesmotic instability: a systematic review. J ISAKOS. 2016;1(5).
19.
• Lilyquist M, et al. Cadaveric analysis of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis. Foot Ankle Int. 2016. Cadaveric study that evaluated the anatomy of distal tibiofibular syndesmosis and the incidence of a prominet tranverse ligament. They found the transverse ligament was only prominent 70% of the time .
20.
• van Dijk CN, et al. Classification and diagnosis of acute isolated syndesmotic injuries: ESSKA-AFAS consensus and guidelines. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016;24(4):1200–16. A literature review by ESSKA-AFAS where they described consensus guidelines for classification and diagnosis of acute isolated syndesmotic injuries CrossRefPubMed
21.
Takao M, et al. Diagnosis of a tear of the tibiofibular syndesmosis. The role of arthroscopy of the ankle. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2003;85(3):324–9.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Colcuc C, et al. Treatment strategies for partial chronic instability of the distal syndesmosis: an arthroscopic grading scale and operative staging concept. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2016;136(2):157–63.CrossRefPubMed
23.
• Watson BC, et al. Arthroscopic evaluation of syndesmotic instability in a cadaveric model. Foot Ankle Int. 2015;36(11):1362–8. Cadaveric study that evaluated how a physician can evaluate syndesmotic instability in multiple planes using arthroscopy. The authors found stability in the sagittal plane is more accurate to diagnosis syndesmotic instability when compared to the coronal plane CrossRefPubMed
24.
• Calder JD, et al. Stable versus unstable grade II high ankle sprains: a prospective study predicting the need for surgical stabilization and time to return to sports. Arthroscopy. 2016;32(4):634–42. This study presents describes a possible method to arthroscopically diagnose syndesmotic instability in grade II high ankle sprains. Also, this study compared how different physical exam tests correlated with stability of the syndesmosis by accessing this arthroscopically
25.
Sikka RS, et al. Correlating MRI findings with disability in syndesmotic sprains of NFL players. Foot Ankle Int. 2012;33(5):371–8.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Yeung TW, et al. Can pre-operative axial CT imaging predict syndesmosis instability in patients sustaining ankle fractures? Seven years' experience in a tertiary trauma center. Skelet Radiol. 2015;44(6):823–9.CrossRef
27.
Sman AD, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for ankle syndesmosis injury. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49(5):323–9.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Miller BS, et al. Time to return to play after high ankle sprains in collegiate football players: a prediction model. Sports Health. 2012;4(6):504–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
29.
Lin CF, Gross ML, Weinhold P. Ankle syndesmosis injuries: anatomy, biomechanics, mechanism of injury, and clinical guidelines for diagnosis and intervention. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2006;36(6):372–84.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Mulligan EP. Evaluation and management of ankle syndesmosis injuries. Phys Ther Sport. 2011;12(2):57–69.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Chen Y, et al. A reliable radiographic measurement for evaluation of normal distal tibiofibular syndesmosis: a multi-detector computed tomography study in adults. J Foot Ankle Res. 2015;8:32.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
32.
Pneumaticos SG, et al. The effects of rotation on radiographic evaluation of the tibiofibular syndesmosis. Foot Ankle Int. 2002;23(2):107–11.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Schairer WW, et al. Arthroscopically assisted open reduction-internal fixation of ankle fractures: significance of the arthroscopic ankle drive-through sign. Arthrosc Tech. 2016;5(2):e407–12.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
34.
Milz P, et al. Lateral ankle ligaments and tibiofibular syndesmosis. 13-MHz high-frequency sonography and MRI compared in 20 patients. Acta Orthop Scand. 1998;69(1):51–5.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Krappel F, Schmitz R, Harland U. Sonographic diagnosis of anterior syndesmosis rupture. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 1997;135(2):116–9.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Durkee NJ, et al. Sonographic evaluation of lower extremity interosseous membrane injuries: retrospective review in 3 patients. J Ultrasound Med. 2003;22(12):1369–75.CrossRefPubMed
37.
38.
Laver L, et al. Plasma rich in growth factors (PRGF) as a treatment for high ankle sprain in elite athletes: a randomized control trial. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015;23(11):3383–92.CrossRefPubMed
39.
Doughtie M. Syndesmotic ankle sprains in football: a survey of national football league athletic trainers. J Athl Train. 1999;34(1):15–8.PubMedPubMedCentral
40.
41.
Schepers T, et al. The management of acute distal tibio-fibular syndesmotic injuries: results of a nationwide survey. Injury. 2012;43(10):1718–23.CrossRefPubMed
42.
McBryde A, et al. Syndesmotic screw placement: a biomechanical analysis. Foot Ankle Int. 1997;18(5):262–6.CrossRefPubMed
43.
Verim O, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of syndesmotic screw position: a finite-element analysis. J Orthop Trauma. 2014;28(4):210–5.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Stuart K, Panchbhavi VK. The fate of syndesmotic screws. Foot Ankle Int. 2011;32(5):S519–25.CrossRefPubMed
45.
Taylor DC, et al. Aggressive surgical treatment and early return to sports in athletes with grade III syndesmosis sprains. Am J Sports Med. 2007;35(11):1833–8.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Liu Q, et al. Analysis of the stress and displacement distribution of inferior tibiofibular syndesmosis injuries repaired with screw fixation: a finite element study. PLoS One. 2013;8(12):e80236.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
47.
van den Bekerom MP, et al. Complications of distal tibiofibular syndesmotic screw stabilization: analysis of 236 patients. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2013;52(4):456–9.CrossRefPubMed
48.
Lalli TA, et al. Economic impact of syndesmosis hardware removal. Foot (Edinb). 2015;25(3):131–3.CrossRef
49.
Gennis E, et al. The fate of the fixed syndesmosis over time. Foot Ankle Int. 2015;36(10):1202–8.CrossRefPubMed
50.
Song DJ, et al. The effect of syndesmosis screw removal on the reduction of the distal tibiofibular joint: a prospective radiographic study. Foot Ankle Int. 2014;35(6):543–8.CrossRefPubMed
51.
Hong CC, Lee WT, Tan KJ. Osteomyelitis after TightRope((R)) fixation of the ankle syndesmosis: a case report and review of the literature. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2015;54(1):130–4.CrossRefPubMed
52.
Qamar F, Kadakia A, Venkateswaran B. An anatomical way of treating ankle syndesmotic injuries. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2011;50(6):762–5.CrossRefPubMed
53.
Rigby RB, Cottom JM. Does the Arthrex TightRope(R) provide maintenance of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis? A 2-year follow-up of 64 TightRopes(R) in 37 patients. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2013;52(5):563–7.CrossRefPubMed
54.
Gough BE, et al. Novel flexible suture fixation for the distal tibiofibular syndesmotic joint injury: a cadaveric biomechanical model. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2014;53(6):706–11.CrossRefPubMed
55.
• van Dijk CN, et al. Conservative and surgical management of acute isolated syndesmotic injuries: ESSKA-AFAS consensus and guidelines. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016;24(4):1217–27. This is a literature review by ESSKA-AFAS that described consensus guidelines for conservative and surgical management of acute dislocated syndesmotic injuries CrossRefPubMed
56.
Xenos JS, et al. The tibiofibular syndesmosis. Evaluation of the ligamentous structures, methods of fixation, and radiographic assessment. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995;77(6):847–56.CrossRefPubMed
57.
Kortekangas T, et al. A prospective randomised study comparing TightRope and syndesmotic screw fixation for accuracy and maintenance of syndesmotic reduction assessed with bilateral computed tomography. Injury. 2015;46(6):1119–26.CrossRefPubMed
58.
Westermann RW, et al. The effect of suture-button fixation on simulated syndesmotic malreduction: a cadaveric study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014;96(20):1732–8.CrossRefPubMed
59.
Laflamme M, et al. A prospective randomized multicenter trial comparing clinical outcomes of patients treated surgically with a static or dynamic implant for acute ankle syndesmosis rupture. J Orthop Trauma. 2015;29(5):216–23.CrossRefPubMed
60.
Cottom JM, et al. Transosseous fixation of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis: comparison of an interosseous suture and endobutton to traditional screw fixation in 50 cases. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2009;48(6):620–30.CrossRefPubMed
61.
Wang L, et al. Biomechanical comparison of bionic, screw and endobutton fixation in the treatment of tibiofibular syndesmosis injuries. Int Orthop. 2016;40(2):307–14.CrossRefPubMed
62.
Seyhan M, et al. Comparison of screw fixation with elastic fixation methods in the treatment of syndesmosis injuries in ankle fractures. Injury. 2015;46(Suppl 2):S19–23.CrossRefPubMed
63.
Naqvi GA, Shafqat A, Awan N. Tightrope fixation of ankle syndesmosis injuries: clinical outcome, complications and technique modification. Injury. 2012;43(6):838–42.CrossRefPubMed
64.
Gardner MJ, et al. Technical considerations in the treatment of syndesmotic injuries associated with ankle fractures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2015;23(8):510–8.CrossRefPubMed
65.
Kennedy JG, et al. Evaluation of the syndesmotic screw in low Weber C ankle fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 2000;14(5):359–66.CrossRefPubMed
66.
Pakarinen HJ, et al. Syndesmotic fixation in supination-external rotation ankle fractures: a prospective randomized study. Foot Ankle Int. 2011;32(12):1103–9.CrossRefPubMed
67.
68.
van den Bekerom MP, de Leeuw PA, van Dijk CN. Delayed operative treatment of syndesmotic instability. Current concepts review. Injury. 2009;40(11):1137–42.CrossRefPubMed
69.
Kelikian H, Kelikian A. Disorders of the ankle. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1985.
70.
Hansen Jr ST, Repair of distal tibiofibular syndesmosis. In Functional construction of the foot and ankle. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2000. p. 507–508.
71.
van Dijk CN. Syndesmotic injuries. Tech Foot Ankle Surg. 2006;5(1):34–7.CrossRef
72.
Beumer A, et al. Late reconstruction of the anterior distal tibiofibular syndesmosis: good outcome in 9 patients. Acta Orthop Scand. 2000;71(5):519–21.CrossRefPubMed
73.
Grass R, et al. Peroneus longus ligamentoplasty for chronic instability of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis. Foot Ankle Int. 2003;24(5):392–7.CrossRefPubMed
74.
75.
Olson KM, Dairyko Jr GH, Toolan BC. Salvage of chronic instability of the syndesmosis with distal tibiofibular arthrodesis: functional and radiographic results. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93(1):66–72.CrossRefPubMed
76.
Kortekangas T, et al. Effect of syndesmosis injury in SER IV (Weber B)-type ankle fractures on function and incidence of osteoarthritis. Foot Ankle Int. 2015;36(2):180–7.CrossRefPubMed
77.
Gill SL, et al. The use and efficacy of intra-operative stress tests in supination-external rotation IV ankle fracture fixation. Surgeon. 2015;13(1):9–14.CrossRefPubMed
78.
Gardner R, et al. Stabilization of the syndesmosis in the Maisonneuve fracture—a biomechanical study comparing 2-hole locking plate and quadricortical screw fixation. J Orthop Trauma. 2013;27(4):212–6.CrossRefPubMed
79.
van der Werken C, Zeegers EV. Fracture of the lower leg with involvement of the posterior malleolus; a neglected combination? Injury. 1988;19(4):241–3.CrossRefPubMed
80.
Franke J, et al. Predictors of a persistent dislocation after reduction of syndesmotic injuries detected with intraoperative three-dimensional imaging. Foot Ankle Int. 2014;35(12):1323–8.CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Current trends in the diagnosis and management of syndesmotic injury
verfasst von
Matthew L. Vopat
Bryan G. Vopat
Bart Lubberts
Christopher W. DiGiovanni
Publikationsdatum
18.01.2017
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine / Ausgabe 1/2017
Elektronische ISSN: 1935-9748
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-017-9389-4

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2017

Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine 1/2017 Zur Ausgabe

Foot and Ankle Sports Medicine (M Drakos, section editor)

Lisfranc injuries

Hand and Wrist Sports Medicine (E Tolo and L Dwyer, section editors)

A review of mallet finger and jersey finger injuries in the athlete

Foot and Ankle Sports Medicine (M Drakos, section editor)

Zone II and III fifth metatarsal fractures in athletes

Foot and Ankle Sports Medicine (M Drakos, section editor)

Achilles tendon injuries

Hand and Wrist Sports Medicine (E Tolo and L Dwyer, section editors)

Scaphoid fractures in the athlete

Foot and Ankle Sports Medicine (M Drakos, section editor)

Tarsal navicular stress fractures

Arthropedia

Grundlagenwissen der Arthroskopie und Gelenkchirurgie. Erweitert durch Fallbeispiele, Videos und Abbildungen. 
» Jetzt entdecken

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

23.04.2024 | Leitsymptom Rückenschmerzen | Nachrichten

Ärztliche Empathie hilft gegen Rückenschmerzen

18.04.2024 | Wirbelsäulenmetastase | Nachrichten

Stereotaktische Radiatio schlägt konventionelle Bestrahlung

16.04.2024 | Spondylitis ankylosans | Nachrichten

Vorsicht mit hohen NSAR-Dosen bei ankylosierender Spondylitis!

15.04.2024 | Knie-TEP | Nachrichten

Brustkrebs in der Vorgeschichte macht Gelenkersatz komplikationsträchtiger
weitere anzeigen

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise