These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Activity Level and Function After Lateral Ankle Ligament Repair Versus Reconstruction.
    Author: Matheny LM, Johnson NS, Liechti DJ, Clanton TO.
    Journal: Am J Sports Med; 2016 May; 44(5):1301-8. PubMed ID: 26920434.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Few studies have compared outcomes of Broström-Gould repair and allograft reconstruction. HYPOTHESIS/PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes and revision rates after Broström-Gould lateral ankle ligament repair versus anatomic allograft reconstruction in patients with lateral ankle instability. The hypothesis was that patients who underwent lateral ankle ligament repair would have outcomes and revision rates similar to those of patients who underwent anatomic allograft reconstruction. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: All patients who underwent surgical repair or reconstruction of the anterior talofibular ligament and/or the calcaneofibular ligament by a single surgeon between September 2009 and February 2013 were included in this study. Patients completed a subjective questionnaire at minimum 2 years after ankle surgery. Outcomes measures included the Foot and Ankle Disability Index (FADI), American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Score, Lysholm score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), Short Form-12 Physical Component Summary (PCS) and Mental Component Summary (MCS) scores, Tegner activity scale, and patient satisfaction with outcome. Detailed surgical data and intraoperative findings were documented at the time of surgery. All data were collected prospectively and reviewed retrospectively. RESULTS: A total of 86 patients were included in this study: 45 men and 41 women (mean age, 38 years; range, 19-68 years) with a mean body mass index of 26.5 (range, 17.5-47.1). There were 61 (71%) patients in the repair cohort and 25 (29%) in the reconstruction cohort. There was no significant difference in age or sex between cohorts. Seventy-six (88%) patients had minimum 2-year follow-up (mean follow-up, 3.0 years; range, 2.0-5.3 years). There was no significant difference in FADI (87 vs 91; P = .553), AOFAS (77 vs 82; P = .372), Lysholm score (83 vs 87; P = .110), Tegner activity scale (6 vs 4; P = .271), patient satisfaction (9 vs 10; P = .058), WOMAC (8 vs 5; P = .264), or Short Form-12 PCS (51.3 vs 54.6; P = .169) or MCS (54.8 vs 51.5; P = .239) score between the repair cohort and the reconstruction cohort, respectively. No patient in either cohort underwent revision lateral ligament surgery. CONCLUSION: When compared with lateral ankle repair, anatomic allograft reconstruction produced similarly favorable outcomes, including high patient satisfaction, high function and activity levels, and no revision surgeries in either cohort.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]