Three-Dimensional Analysis of Fibular Motion After Fixation of Syndesmotic Injuries With a Screw or Suture-Button Construct. (December 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: LaMothe, Jeremy M.; Baxter, Josh R.; Murphy, Conor; Gilbert, Susannah; DeSandis, Bridget; Drakos, Mark C.
• Is Part Of: Foot & ankle international. Volume 37:Number 12(2016:Dec.)
• Page Start: 1350
• Page End: 1356
• Publication Date: 2016-12
• Subjects: syndesmosis -- ankle -- suture-button construct -- injury -- screw; Foot -- Abnormalities -- Periodicals; Ankle -- Abnormalities -- Periodicals; Orthopedics -- Periodicals; 617.585
• DOI: 10.1177/1071100716666865
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1071-1007

Abstract

Background: Suture-button constructs are an alternative to screw fixation for syndesmotic injuries, and proponents advocate that suture-button constructs may allow physiological motion of the syndesmosis. Recent biomechanical data suggest that fibular instability with syndesmotic injuries is greatest in the sagittal plane, but the design of a suture-button construct, being a rope and 2 retention washers, is most effective along the axis of the rope (in the coronal plane). Some studies report that suture-button constructs are able to constrain fibular motion in the coronal plane, but the ability of a tightrope to constrain sagittal fibular motion is unknown. The purpose of this study was to assess fibular motion in response to an external rotation stress test in a syndesmotic injury model after fixation with a screw or suture-button constructs. Methods: Eleven fresh-frozen cadaver whole legs with intact tibia-fibula articulations were secured to a custom fixture. Fibular motion (coronal, sagittal, and rotational planes) in response to a 6.5-Nm external rotation moment applied to the foot was recorded with fluoroscopy and a high-resolution motion capture system. Measures were taken for the following syndesmotic conditions: intact, complete lateral injury, complete lateral and deltoid injury, repair with a tetracortical 4.0-mm screw, and repair with a suture button construct (Tightrope; Arthrex, Naples, FL) aimed from the lateral fibula to the anterior medial malleolus. Results: The suture-button construct allowed significantly more sagittal plane motion than the syndesmotic screw. Measurements acquired with mortise imaging did not detect differences between the intact, lateral injury, and 2 repair conditions. External rotation of the fibula was significantly increased in both injury conditions and was not restored to intact levels with the screw or the suture-button construct. Conclusion: A single suture-button placed from the lateral fibula to the anterior medial malleolus was unable to replicate the motion observed in the intact specimen when subjected to an external rotation stress test and allowed significantly more posterior motion of the fibula than when fixed with a screw in simulated highly unstable injuries. Clinical Relevance: Fixation of a syndesmotic injury with a single suture-button construct did not restore physiological fibular motion, which may have implications for postoperative care and clinical outcomes.