Selective deep peroneal nerve injury associated with arthroscopic knee surgery

1993 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 1188-1192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter C. Esselman ◽  
Mark A. Tomski ◽  
Lawrence R. Robinson ◽  
James Zisfein ◽  
Stephen J. Marks
2019 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 320-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel James Meyerkort ◽  
Ron Gurel ◽  
Dror Maor ◽  
James David Forbes Calder

Background: Surgical exposure of the Lisfranc joint complex is within close proximity to the deep peroneal nerve, which can be injured in this approach. Common clinical practice is to remove Lisfranc hardware at 3 to 4 months postoperatively. However, it is unknown if this provides a clinical benefit or risks injury to the deep peroneal nerve. The rate of nerve injury is currently unknown from the published literature. This study clarifies rates of neurological injury to the deep peroneal nerve during primary surgery and hardware removal. Methods: This retrospective study was performed on all patients of a single surgeon from 2012 to 2018. Fixation was performed with locking plates or screws depending on the injury pattern. All patients who required open reduction and internal fixation routinely underwent hardware removal during this time. Neurological injury was assessed in a binary fashion (normal or abnormal) at 2, 6, and 12 weeks after the primary surgery and 2 and 12 weeks after hardware removal. McNemar’s test was performed to compare the rates of injury. Patients were contacted at a minimum follow-up of 15 months (range, 15-87 months) to assess persistent nerve injury and satisfaction. Fifty-seven patients with an average age of 29.8 years were included in the final analysis; all had documentation at 3 months postsurgery. Results: All patients had normal neurology before surgery. The rate of nerve injury for the primary surgery (11%) was significantly lower than the rate for patients with nerve injury following hardware removal (23%). However, the rate of spontaneous neurological recovery was low, with symptoms persisting in 5 of 6 patients between the primary operation and subsequent hardware removal. When these patients were excluded from the analysis, the rate of new nerve injury following hardware removal (15%) was not significantly different from the primary surgery rate. Seventy-one percent of nerve injuries persisted at the minimum 15-month final follow-up, with all patients with nerve injury being very or partially satisfied. Conclusion: The rate of deep peroneal nerve injury from primary Lisfranc fixation was 11%, and when routine hardware removal was planned the overall rate of nerve injury rose to 23%. This may be useful information during the patient consent process. Level of Evidence: Level IV, case series.


2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lijun Shi ◽  
Haiyun Zhu ◽  
Jinhui Ma ◽  
Li-Li Shi ◽  
Fuqiang Gao ◽  
...  

Abstract Objective We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intra-articular (IA) magnesium (Mg) for postoperative pain relief after arthroscopic knee surgery. Methods We searched PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane library, and Web of Science to identify randomized controlled trials that compared postoperative pain outcomes with or without IA Mg after knee arthroscopy. The primary outcomes were pain intensity at rest and with movement at different postoperative time points and cumulative opioid consumption within 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included the time to first analgesic request and side effects. Results In total, 11 studies involving 677 participants met the eligibility criteria. Pain scores at rest and with movement 2, 4, 12, and 24 h after surgery were significantly lower, doses of supplementary opioid consumption were smaller, and the time to first analgesic requirement was longer in the IA Mg group compared with the control group. No significant difference was detected regarding adverse reactions between the groups. Conclusions Intra-articular magnesium is an effective and safe coadjuvant treatment for relieving postoperative pain intensity after arthroscopic knee surgery. Protocol registration at PROSPERO: CRD42020156403.


2007 ◽  
Vol 19 (8) ◽  
pp. 576-582 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria E. Gómez-Vázquez ◽  
Eduardo Hernández-Salazar ◽  
Abel Hernández-Jiménez ◽  
Arturo Pérez-Sánchez ◽  
Vilma A. Zepeda-López ◽  
...  

Vascular ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 102-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zachary Aburahma ◽  
Stephen M Hass

We report a case of a pseudoaneurysm of the popliteal artery following arthroscopic knee surgery. Endovascular repair was successfully used as the treatment for this patient and studies have shown this to be a safe alternative to surgery.


2004 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 307-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia H. Rosenberger ◽  
Jeannette R. Ickovics ◽  
Elissa S. Epel ◽  
Danielle D’Entremont ◽  
Peter Jokl

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document