Arthrodesis or Open Reduction Internal Fixation for Lisfranc Injuries: A Meta-analysis

The purpose of this study is to determine if arthrodesis, compared with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), produces favorable American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, and to determine if differences in complication, revision surgery, and s...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Foot & Ankle Specialist 2022-04, Vol.15 (2), p.179-184
Main Authors: Levy, Christopher J., Yatsonsky, David, Moral, Muhammad Z., Liu, Jiayong, Ebraheim, Nabil A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Arthrodesis - methods
Fracture Fixation, Internal - methods
Fractures, Bone - surgery
Humans
Open Fracture Reduction
Retrospective Studies
Treatment Outcome
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The purpose of this study is to determine if arthrodesis, compared with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), produces favorable American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, and to determine if differences in complication, revision surgery, and secondary arthrodesis rates exist for patients with Lisfranc fracture/dislocation injuries. Searches were performed in PubMed using the keywords “Lisfranc fracture,” “metatarsal fracture,” “ORIF,” “open reduction internal fixation,” “arthrodesis,” and “fusion.” These criteria left 183 articles for review. Exclusions left 21 articles and 2 translations of Chinese abstracts. Data analysis was performed using Student’s 2-sample t test for samples of equal variance, and chi-square test for goodness of fit. The t test revealed a significant difference (P = .03) between the average AOFAS score for patients who underwent primary arthrodesis (84.7 ± 6.14) compared with those who were treated with ORIF (78.9 ± 5.09). There was no significant difference for the average VAS scores (P = .33) of the arthrodesis and ORIF groups. The complication rate of arthrodesis patients was significantly lower than ORIF patients (P = .04), and the rates of revision surgery (P = .22) and secondary arthrodesis (P = .53) were not significant between the groups. The results of this study indicate that arthrodesis may be a better surgical option than ORIF, due to the higher functional scores and the lower complication rate. Levels of Evidence: Level III: A meta-analysis
ISSN:1938-6400
1938-7636
DOI:10.1177/1938640020971419