lisfranc injury
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

142
(FIVE YEARS 48)

H-INDEX

16
(FIVE YEARS 2)

2022 ◽  
pp. e4
Author(s):  
Hiroyuki Funatomi ◽  
Akira Kuriyama
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Wen-Qi Gu ◽  
Rui Zhang ◽  
Wan-Jun Liu ◽  
Zhong-Min Shi ◽  
Guo-Hua Mei ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 193864002110582
Author(s):  
Eric So ◽  
Jonathan Lee ◽  
Michelle L. Pershing ◽  
Anson K. Chu ◽  
Matthew Wilson ◽  
...  

There is a lack of consensus in the literature regarding optimal treatment methods for Lisfranc injuries, and recent literature has emphasized the need to compare open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with primary arthrodesis (PA). The purpose of the current study is to compare reoperation and complication rates between ORIF and PA following Lisfranc injury in a private, outpatient, orthopaedic practice. A retrospective chart review was performed on patients undergoing operative intervention for Lisfranc injury between January 2009 and September 2015. A total of 196 patients met the inclusion criteria (130 ORIF, 66 PA), with a mean follow-up of 61.3 and 81.7 weeks, respectively. The ORIF group had a higher reoperation rate than the PA group, due to hardware removal. When hardware removals were excluded, the reoperation rate was similar. Postsurgical complications were compared between the 2 groups with no significant difference. In conclusion, ORIF and PA had similar complication rates. When hardware removals were excluded, the reoperation rates were similar, although hardware removals were more common in the ORIF group compared with the PA group. Levels of Evidence: Level III


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dong Q ◽  
◽  
Qu Z ◽  
Wang G ◽  
Huang H ◽  
...  

Total lateral incongruity type Lisfranc injury may cause skin problems and compartment syndrome, manual reduction and temporary immobilization are usually needed. However, sometimes-manual reduction is not easy to achieve due to the prevention of reduction by interposed soft tissues. We report two cases of irreducible Lisfranc injuries due to interposition of the anterior tibial tendon between the medial and intermediate cuneiform bones. Our recommendation for manual reduction in total lateral incongruity with suspicion of the anterior tibial tendon’s interposition is to push up the forefoot dorsally under the distraction, abduct the forefoot, displace the forefoot medially, and adduct the forefoot in sequence.


2021 ◽  
pp. 107110072110129
Author(s):  
Daniel Garríguez-Pérez ◽  
María Puerto-Vázquez ◽  
José Luis Tomé Delgado ◽  
Enrique Galeote ◽  
Fernando Marco

Background: The subtle Lisfranc injury is the disruption of the osteoligamentary complex between the first cuneiform and the second metatarsal, resulting in minor widening of this space that is often difficult to detect with plain radiographs. In this study, we assessed the results after treatment of the different stages of subtle Lisfranc injuries, focusing on their impact on foot arch anatomy and functionality at short- to midterm follow-up. Methods: A retrospective study including patients treated in our center for a subtle Lisfranc injury between 2012 and 2019 was conducted. Demographic, epidemiologic, radiographic, and clinical data were obtained and assessed, focusing on foot arch structure and foot function, which was evaluated with the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot score and the Foot Function Index (FFI). Results: A total of 42 patients with a mean age of 49 ± 17.5 years were included, with an average of 4.3 years’ follow-up (range, 1-8). Stage I injuries according to Nunley classification represented 19% and were treated conservatively. Stage II (66.7%) and stage III (14.3%) injuries were treated operatively, via osteosynthesis with screws (74%), K-wires (19%), or plates (7%). Flattening of foot arch after treatment was observed in 42.9% of patients, with significant increases in Costa-Bertani (12 ± 7 degrees), Hibbs (7 ± 6 degrees), and Meary (3 ± 1 degrees) angles. Other complications included complex regional pain syndrome (28.6%) and painful hardware (23.8%). Secondary joint arthrodesis was needed in 16.6% of patients. Chronic pain was present in 71.4% of patients with a mean visual analog scale (VAS) pain score at final follow-up of 4 of 10 points. Results in AOFAS midfoot score and FFI were 87.4 ± 8.3 and 15 ± 6.4, respectively. Conclusion: The subtle Lisfranc injury shows dissociation between the initial relatively mild radiographic changes and important future complications. Chronic pain and foot arch flattening were not uncommon. Overall foot function in the short- or midterm was found to be modestly diminished in this somewhat heterogenous cohort. Level of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic case series.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document