Primary Arthrodesis versus Open Reduction and Internal Fixation for Low-Energy Lisfranc Injuries in a Young Athletic Population. (September 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Cochran, Grant; Renninger, Christopher; Tompane, Trevor; Bellamy, Joseph; Kuhn, Kevin
• Is Part Of: Foot & ankle international. Volume 38:Number 9(2017:Sep.)
• Page Start: 957
• Page End: 963
• Publication Date: 2017-09
• Subjects: Lisfranc -- ORIF -- arthrodesis -- midfoot; Foot -- Abnormalities -- Periodicals; Ankle -- Abnormalities -- Periodicals; Orthopedics -- Periodicals; 617.585
• DOI: 10.1177/1071100717711483
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1071-1007

Abstract

Background: There are 2 Level I studies comparing open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and primary arthrodesis (PA) in high-energy Lisfranc injuries. There are no studies comparing ORIF and PA in young athletic patients with low-energy injuries. Methods: All operatively managed low-energy Lisfranc injuries sustained by active duty military personnel at a single institution were identified from 2010 to 2015. The injury pattern, method of treatment, and complications were reviewed. Implant removal rates, fitness test scores, return to military duty rates, and Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) scores were compared. Thirty-two patients were identified with the average age of 28 years. PA was performed in 14 patients with ORIF in 18. Results: The PA group returned to full duty at an average of 4.5 months whereas the ORIF group returned at an average of 6.7 months ( P = .0066). The PA group ran their fitness test an average of 9 seconds per mile slower than their preoperative average whereas the ORIF group ran it an average of 39 seconds slower per mile ( P = .032). There were no differences between the 2 groups in the FAAM scores at an average of 35 months. Implant removal was performed in 15 (83%) in the ORIF group and 2 (14%) in the PA group ( P = .005). Conclusions: Low-energy Lisfranc injuries treated with primary arthrodesis had a lower implant removal rate, an earlier return to full military activity, and better fitness test scores after 1 year, but there was no difference in FAAM scores after 3 years. Level of Evidence: Level III, comparative cohort study.