A single surgeon's experience of treatment of Lisfranc joint injuries

This paper assesses the outcomes and complications of Lisfranc joint injuries treated at a regional trauma centre under the care of a single surgeon. We performed a retrospective study of all patients that underwent ORIF of a Lisfranc joint injury over a 5-year period. Case note review, radiology review, and questionnaire assessment were performed. We analysed for correlations between outcome and injury type, mechanism of injury, and presence of other ipsilateral limb injury and pure ligamentous injury. All injuries were classified according to a system described by Myerson et al. (Types A, B1, B2, C1, C2). Radiographs were also assessed for the presence of pure ligamentous injury. Outcome was measured using the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle society (AOFAS) midfoot score. Twenty-five injuries (24 patients) were identified and 16 injuries (15 patients) were available for follow. The mean duration of follow up was 42.6 months (11-69). The mean outcome score was 78.3 (38-100). The outcome scores for pure ligamentous injury (74.9) and for mixed bony and ligamentous injury (80.9) had no significant difference (p=0.61). High-energy trauma accounted for 50% of cases, and scored significantly less than low energy trauma (69.1 versus 87.4, p<0.05). There was an associated injury in the ipsilateral limb in 31% of cases and this group had a poorer outcome (63.0 versus 85.3, p<0.035). The most common injury type was B2 (38%). Type C2 injuries (divergent with total displacement) had a worse outcome than the mean outcome of all other categories (60.5 versus 84.4, p<0.01). Our mean outcome from ORIF of Lisfranc joint injuries is comparable to internationally quoted figures. Pure ligamentous injuries did no worse statistically than mixed bony and ligamentous injuries. Poorer outcome was associated with high-energy trauma, associated injury on the ipsilateral limb, and Type C2 injuries.     

CT and Functional Outcomes of Primarily Ligamentous and Combined Ligamentous-Bony Lisfranc Injuries: A Retrospective Review

Lisfranc injuries have been rising in incidence and can cause significant and lasting morbidity. There is no consensus on the optimal surgical treatment for these injuries, be they primarily ligamentous or combined (bony and ligamentous). No study has ever followed Lisfranc injury patients postoperatively using advanced imaging. The purpose of this study was to compare the functional and radiographic outcomes of primarily ligamentous and combined osseous and ligamentous Lisfranc injuries treated operatively with reduction and fixation. We performed a retrospective review of all Lisfranc injuries treated operatively in a single institution over a 6-year period. Injuries were classified as primarily ligamentous or combined by independent evaluation of available computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging. Outcomes were measured using the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA). CT of 29 patients was performed at last follow-up to evaluate reduction and degenerative changes. Of the 56 patients identified, 38 were available for follow-up. The average follow-up was 3.8 years. There were 26 combined injuries and 12 primarily ligamentous injuries. Outcomes were excellent in all patients and there was no statistical difference in SMFA scores in any category between the groups. On follow-up CT, all injuries were anatomically reduced, and 26 of 29 patients had degenerative changes. Our results support that reduction and stable fixation of Lisfranc injuries may be suitable treatment regardless of classification as combined or primarily ligamentous. Future larger-scale prospective studies should be pursued to supplement existing data.     

Correlation of Lisfranc Injuries With Regional Bone Density

Lisfranc injuries present a challenge due to their ubiquity though frequent missed diagnoses. A paucity of data exists associating the contribution of bone density to injury type. This investigation compares the regional bone density between Lisfranc injury types using computed-tomography (CT)-derived Hounsfield units. A retrospective chart review identified patients with gross ligamentous and avulsion-type Lisfranc injuries determined by CT examination of the second metatarsal base and medial cuneiform. Regional bone density was assessed by averaging the Hounsfield units of the first metatarsal base, navicular, cuboid, calcaneus, and talus between 2 reviewers. Density was compared between injury type, isolated concomitant forefoot, and mid/hindfoot fractures. One hundred thirty-four patients were separated into avulsion (n = 85) and ligamentous (n = 49) groups. No statistically significant difference in patient body mass index, age, smoking status, or Quenu and Kuss injury pattern was observed between groups. The regional bone density of the cuboid (p = .03) and talus (p = .04) was greater in the ligamentous group. Lower extremity concomitant mid/hindfoot fracture patients exhibited greater regional bone density in the ligamentous group in all assessed bones (p ≤ .04) except the calcaneus. Ligamentous injuries of the Lisfranc complex are associated with increased regional bone density among patients sustaining concomitant mid/hindfoot fractures. This study expands the utility of regional bone density analysis in foot and ankle trauma.     

Adolescent Lisfranc injury treated with TightRope~(TM):A case report and review of literature

BACKGROUND Lisfranc injuries are rare and can be easily missed. This injury is extremely rare in children, with limited published data. Different treatment options have been described; one of the options in adults is the "mini" TightRope~(TM) Syndesmosis Device that provides non-rigid fixation with impressive results. However, there is no reference regarding the use of this device in children.CASE SUMMARY We describe the case of an 11-year-old girl who sustained a Lisfranc injury of her right foot that was initially missed in the Accident and Emergency department of her local hospital. This case was a ligamentous/periosteal sleeve avulsion type of Lisfranc injury and a percutaneous technique using the "mini" TightRope~(TM)syndesmosis device was used. Clinical and radiological results were excellent at final follow up.CONCLUSION The "mini" TightRope~(TM) syndesmosis device is a promising method of fixation for children with certain Lisfranc injuries. This method has many advantages,including the non-rigid type of the fixation and no need for subsequent metalwork removal.     

The Lisfranc joint

The Lisfranc joint encompasses 6 articulations, weak dorsal ligaments, and strong plantar ligaments. The Lisfranc ligament serves to secure the second metatarsal in the keystone of the midfoot. Traumatic ligament injury and fracture can result in deformity, instability, pain, and degenerative joint disease of the Lisfranc joint. Increased awareness of Lisfranc joint anatomy and advanced imaging has allowed more accurate diagnosis and treatment of this injured joint complex. Nontraumatic degenerative joint disease can also result from congenital and acquired deformity such as first ray insufficiency, abnormal metatarsal parabola, and equinus. Open reduction with internal fixation (ORIF) demands accurate anatomic alignment to prevent the need for salvage arthrodesis. Early studies have shown that primary arthrodesis of the medial 3 rays has performed equally well or better than ORIF for the displaced primarily ligamentous and severe injuries. A paradigm shift may emerge as more studies favor primary arthrodesis.     

Undisplaced subtle ligamentous Lisfranc injuries, conservative or surgical treatment with percutaneous position screws?

Purpose: Undisplaced subtle ligamentous Lisfranc injuries are easy to miss or underestimate, and many cases are treated without surgical fixation. It has not yet widely known whether conservative treatment for undisplaced subtle ligamentous Lisfranc injuries may lead to a poor outcome. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of conservative versus surgical management (percutaneous position screw) of undisplaced subtle ligamentous Lisfranc injury. Methods: We analysed 61 cases in this retrospective study, including 38 males and 23 females. Forty-one patients were managed conservatively, while 20 patients received surgical treatment involving minimal invasive percutaneous position screw. American orthopaedic foot &ankle society (AOFAS), foot function index (FFI, including FFI disability, FFI pain score and activity limitation scale) scores, Maryland foot score and short form-36 (SF-36) were recorded and compared after a follow-up of 10e16 months (average 12.3). Results: Patients in the surgical management group had higher scores in all evaluation methods (p < 0.05). The complications in the conservative management group had higher incidence, mainly including secondary diastasis (34.1% vs. 5.0%), joint stiffness after 3 months (82.9% vs. 0%), and secondary arthrodesis (12.2% vs. 0%). The highest rate of complication in surgical management group was temporary forefoot pain (55.0%). Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that the outcomes of the surgical management with percutaneous position screw fixation are better than the conservative management to treat undisplaced subtle ligamentous Lisfranc injuries. This study can serve as a resource for orthopaedic surgeons in recognizing and managing such injuries.     

Pediatric Lisfranc variants and equivalent injuries: A review

IntroductionPediatric Lisfranc injuries are rare and a limited number of series or case reports have been published. Diagnosis can be easily missed and long-term outcome is not sufficiently presented. The primary aim of this paper is to review the literature about pediatric Lisfranc variants and equivalent injuries. This article also provides a review on Lisfranc joint anatomy, pediatric Lisfranc injuries, and stress or acute fractures involving the first and central (second to third) metatarsal (MT) bases, in an effort to detect potential pediatric Lisfranc variants and equivalent injuries, which were not accurately diagnosed.MethodsThe bibliographic survey to identify pediatric Lisfranc variants and equivalent injuries was conducted in the PubMed and Scopus databases, with no time limit. Four terms were used for searching in all possible combinations: Pediatric/children, Lisfranc/tarsometatarsal, variant/equivalent, injury/fracture. The only inclusion criterion was the age of the patients, which had to be less than 12 years. Reports on adolescents or adults were excluded.ResultsThe research indicated that there was only one study mentioning the pediatric Lisfranc equivalent injury, while there were no cases recorded as pediatric Lisfranc variants. The literature review regarding the final clinical outcome of both pediatric Lisfranc injuries and fractures, either stress or acute, involving the central MT base, indicated that early degenerative changes often occur, and may be responsible for chronic pain and activity limitation, even after mild and subtle low energy injuries.Discussion/ConclusionsThis review suggests that stress fractures involving the central MT base could be considered as a variant of the Lisfranc injury in children. Care should be taken to exclude occult fractures or ligamentous injuries to the medial and central Lisfranc joint complex in the presence of fractures involving the base or proximal portion of the first MT, including injuries to the physeal plate, to rule out the pediatric Lisfranc equivalent injury.     

Arthrodesis versus ORIF for Lisfranc fractures

The Lisfranc joints make up the bony structural support of the transverse arch in the midfoot and account for approximately 0.2% of all fractures. Early recognition and treatment of this injury are paramount to preserving normal foot biomechanics and function. Controversy exists regarding the optimal treatment of patients with Lisfranc injuries, particularly when the instability is entirely ligamentous.The authors performed a qualitative, systematic review of the literature to compare the 2 most common procedures for Lisfranc fractures: primary arthrodesis and open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). Six articles with a total of 193 patients met the inclusion criteria. At 1-year follow-up, the mean American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society score of ORIF patients was 72.5 and of arthrodesis patients was 88.0. Fisher's exact test revealed no significant effect of treatment group on the percentage on patients who had an anatomic reduction (P=.319).This study highlights that both procedures yield satisfactory and equivalent results. A slight advantage may exist in performing a primary arthrodesis for Lisfranc joint injuries in terms of clinical outcomes.     

Tarsometatarsal/Lisfranc joint

Accurate early diagnosis with adequate reduction and maintenance of anatomic alignment of the dislocation or fracture within the Lisfranc joint complex have been found to be the key to successful outcomes regarding this injury. Because of the anatomic variations, the thin soft tissue envelop, and the abundance of ligamentous and capsular structures in the region, repair of these injuries can be a challenge. The classification systems used to describe these injuries aid in describing the mechanism of injury or displacement type present, which may aid in determining what treatment modality can provide the best outcome.     

Outcome after open reduction and internal fixation of Lisfranc joint injuries

BACKGROUND: Open reduction and internal fixation has been recommended as the treatment for most unstable injuries of the Lisfranc (tarsometatarsal) joint. It has been thought that purely ligamentous injuries have a poor outcome despite such surgical management. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients who underwent open reduction and screw fixation of a Lisfranc injury in a seven-year period. Among ninety-two adults treated for that injury, forty-eight patients with forty-eight injuries were followed for an average of fifty-two months (range, thirteen to 114 months). Fifteen injuries were purely ligamentous, and thirty-three were combined ligamentous and osseous. Patient outcome was assessed with use of the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot score and the long-form Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (MFA) score. RESULTS: The average AOFAS midfoot score was 77 points (on a scale of 0 to 100 points, with 100 points indicating an excellent outcome), with patients losing points for mild pain, decreased recreational function, and orthotic requirements. The average MFA score was 19 points (on a scale of 0 to 100 points, with 0 points indicating an excellent outcome), with patients losing points because of problems with "leisure activities" and difficulties with "life changes and feelings due to the injury." Twelve patients (25 percent) had posttraumatic osteoarthritis of the tarsometatarsal joints, and six of them required arthrodesis. The major determinant of a good result was anatomical reduction (p = 0.05). The subgroup of patients with purely ligamentous injury showed a trend toward poorer outcomes despite anatomical reduction and screw fixation. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the concept that stable anatomical reduction of fracture-dislocations of the Lisfranc joint leads to the best long-term outcomes as patients so treated have less arthritis as well as better AOFAS midfoot scores.     

Le fratture-lussazioni della Lisfranc

Lisfranc fracture-dislocations are an uncommon injury involving the tarsometatarsal joint and represent a broad spectrum of injuries, which can be purely ligamentous or may involve the osseous and articular structures. Lisfranc injuries are often misdiagnosed and mismanaged; if they are not detected at an early stage and appropriately treated, they can cause long-term disability and will lead to midfoot arthritis. This article outlines the anatomy, epidemiology, classification, investigation and current evidence on treatment of this injury.     

Treatment of primarily ligamentous Lisfranc joint injuries: primary arthrodesis compared with open reduction and internal fixation. A prospective, randomized study

BACKGROUND: Open reduction and internal fixation is currently the accepted treatment for displaced Lisfranc joint injuries. However, even with anatomic reduction and stable internal fixation, treatment of these injuries does not have uniformly excellent outcomes. The objective of this study was to compare primary arthrodesis with open reduction and internal fixation for the treatment of primarily ligamentous Lisfranc joint injuries. METHODS: Forty-one patients with an isolated acute or subacute primarily ligamentous Lisfranc joint injury were enrolled in a prospective, randomized clinical trial comparing primary arthrodesis with traditional open reduction and internal fixation. The patients were followed for an average of 42.5 months. Evaluation was performed with clinical examination, radiography, the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Midfoot Scale, a visual analog pain scale, and a clinical questionnaire. RESULTS: Twenty patients were treated with open reduction and screw fixation, and twenty-one patients were treated with primary arthrodesis of the medial two or three rays. Anatomic initial reduction was obtained in eighteen of the twenty patients in the open-reduction group and twenty of the twenty-one in the arthrodesis group. At two years postoperatively, the mean AOFAS Midfoot score was 68.6 points in the open-reduction group and 88 points in the arthrodesis group (p < 0.005). Five patients in the open-reduction group had persistent pain with the development of deformity or osteoarthrosis, and they were eventually treated with arthrodesis. The patients who had been treated with a primary arthrodesis estimated that their postoperative level of activities was 92% of their preinjury level, whereas the open-reduction group estimated that their postoperative level was only 65% of their preoperative level (p < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: A primary stable arthrodesis of the medial two or three rays appears to have a better short and medium-term outcome than open reduction and internal fixation of ligamentous Lisfranc joint injuries.     

Lisfranc injury and Jones fracture in sports

This article provides an update and overview of Lisfranc injury and Jones fracture in the athletic population. Sports-related Lisfranc sprains or fractures are subtle injuries that can be easily missed. Now, there is greater understanding of midfoot sprains that represent a spectrum of injury to the Lisfranc ligament complex. Most types of fifth metatarsal fractures have a favorable prognosis and can be treated conservatively. The treatment options for Jones fractures in athletes have been much debated. This article discusses issues related to anatomy, mechanism of injury, clinical presentation, imaging, and diagnosis, which are necessary to appropriately treat these injuries.     

Treatment of Lisfranc Injuries Using Interosseous Suture Button: A Retrospective Review of 84 Cases With a Minimum 3-Year Follow-Up

Lisfranc fracture dislocation is an injury often encountered by the foot and ankle surgeon. This injury, depending on the severity and level of energy, has been shown to lead to posttraumatic osteoarthritis and chronic pain if undiagnosed or improperly managed. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the surgical repair with the use of an interosseous suture button for Lisfranc injuries with isolated ligamentous disruption. From 2008 through 2016, 104 patients were consecutively enrolled who underwent open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) of the Lisfranc complex with a suture button and stabilization of the medial and intermediate cuneiform with a 4.0-mm screw. Eighty-four patients were available for a 3-year minimum follow-up. The mean return to full weightbearing was 11 days protected in a controlled ankle motion (CAM) boot. American Orthopedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) and visual analog scale (VAS) scores improved from 30 and 8.4, respectfully, preoperatively to 90 and 1.3 postoperatively. The mean preoperative step-off between the second metatarsal base and intermediate cuneiform was found to be 3.15 mm. The immediate postreduction weightbearing radiograph measured 0.25 mm and 0.43 mm at the final follow-up evaluation, a difference that was found to be significant. There were no revision arthrodeses performed and no removal of the suture button during this time period. ORIF using an interosseous suture button appears to have an adequate medium-term patient satisfaction; however, there is evidence of minimal diastasis in some patients at 3 years postoperatively in ligamentous Lisfranc fracture dislocations.     

Primary internal fixation and soft-tissue reconstruction in the treatment for an open Lisfranc fracture-dislocation

The importance of anatomical reduction for improved outcome has been recognised in the management of Lisfranc injuries. Operative fixation is indicated in case of dislocation or unstable ligamentous injury, because discongruity of the Lisfranc joint can lead to deleterious functional outcome. Screws are the recommended method of fixation of the medial en middle column, and K-wires are used for stabilisation of the unstable lateral column. Primary arthrodesis can provide advantages in pure ligamentous injury. In the management of complex open Lisfranc fractures, external fixation with K-wires can be used, but often results in a high percentage of arc deformities and functional limitations. In recent years, there is a progressive change from external to internal fixation in primary stabilisation of open fractures. This case report describes the treatment for a grade III open Lisfranc fracture-dislocation by use of primary internal fixation and soft-tissue reconstruction.     

Outcome after anatomic reduction and transfixation with Kirschner wires of Lisfranc joint injuries

Injuries to the tarsometatarsal (Lisfranc) joint are uncommon, and the results of treatment are often unsatisfactory. Open reduction and internal fixation has been recommended as the treatment of choice for most unstable injuries. In the present study, we reviewed 16 patients who underwent closed or open reduction and Kirschner-wire transfixation of a Lisfranc injury in an 11-year period. Mean follow-up was 44 (range, 12–108) months. Average American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot score was 78 (range, 45–100) points. Eight patients (50%) developed posttraumatic arthritis of the tarsometatarsal joints. The major cause was nonanatomical reduction, whereas patients with purely ligamentous injury showed a trend toward poorer postoperative outcome. On the basis of our study, open anatomical reduction of fracture-dislocations of the Lisfranc joint and Kirschner-wire transfixation leads to the best long-term outcome.     

Reconstruction After Malunited Lisfranc Injuries

Symptomatic secondary osteoarthritis of the Lisfranc joints due to malunion following Lisfranc joint fracture dislocations or ligamentous lesions at the Lisfranc and innominate joint level generally lead to a painful functional loss and a substantial disturbance of the walking performance. Initially missed or inadequately addressed primary lesions still represent the major source of Lisfranc joint malunions. Neuro-osteoarthropathic disorders may also become manifest in the Lisfranc joint region and may be mistaken for truly posttraumatic consequences. Secondary osteoarthritis may be combined with typical multiplanar deformities. The concept of a corrective arthrodesis includes restoration of stable physiologic axes and length proportions of the foot columns. A standardized approach to analyze the clinical picture and corresponding pathomorphology and the transfer into a comprehensive surgical concept which respects the realignment of any component of deformity is a prerequisite for a good functional outcome and a high degree of patient satisfaction. A fusion limited to the medial three rays combined with a soft tissue release may be sufficient for a favorable outcome in the majority of cases and preserve the mobility of the two lateral rays.     

Novel values in the radiographic diagnosis of ligamentous Lisfranc injuries

BackgroundLigamentous Lisfranc instability is commonly missed on unilateral radiographs. However, measurement protocols for bilateral weightbearing radiographs have not been standardized. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the optimal cut-off values for diagnosing Lisfranc instability by evaluating the side-to-side differences of preoperative bilateral weightbearing radiographs among patients with surgically-confirmed ligamentous Lisfranc instability. A secondary aim was to investigate whether the midfoot measurements for detecting Lisfranc injury could also be used in patients with a pre-existing bilateral Hallux Valgus (HV) deformity by evaluating whether the Lisfranc measurements could be affected by a foot deformity as HV.Patients and methodsPatients who underwent surgical repair of ligamentous Lisfranc instability, as well as a separate cohort with bilateral hallux valgus deformity, were included in this multicenter retrospective cohort study. A standardized radiographic measurement protocol was used to assess the midfoot and a receiver operator correlation (ROC) analysis was used to identify the optimal cut-off value for measurements. Interclass Correlation (ICC) scores were calculated to assess the interrater reliability of the Lisfranc area measurement.ResultsForty-seven patients were included in the Lisfranc group with a mean age of 33 (± 15) years and 25 patients were included in the HV group with a mean age of 51 (± 15) years. For the Lisfranc group, measurements that demonstrated a significant side-to-side difference included; increased C1M2 diastasis of 2.4 mm (± 1.4, P<0.001), increased C1M2 surface area of 24 mm² (± 15, P<0.001), C2M2 malignment by 1.7 mm (± 1.2, P<0.001), second tarsometatarsal joint dorsal step-off sign by 0.8 mm (± 0.7, P<0.001), and arch height by 2.5 mm (± 6.4, P<0.048), all greater on the injured side. In the HV group, side-to-side measurements were not significantly different. There was no significant difference comparing the M1M2 measurement in the HV group with the injured (P = 0.16) or uninjured (P = 0.08) foot in the Lisfranc group. The optimal cut-off points were between the injured and uninjured foot in the Lisfranc group were 2.1 mm for C1M2 diastasis, 0.7 mm for the C2M2 alignment, and 30 mm² for the C1M2 surface area. The ICC-score for the second C1M2 area measurement was 0.88.ConclusionBilateral foot weightbearing radiographs can effectively diagnose ligamentous Lisfranc instability using a standardized measurement protocol. Malalignment of the medial aspect of the second metatarsal base ≥0.3 mm relatively to the intermediate cuneiform offers a high sensitivity, and distance ≥2.1 mm between the second metatarsal base and the medial cuneiform has a high specificity. Intermetatarsal distance between the first and second metatarsal base has a low sensitivity and specificity and should not be used in solitary for diagnosis.Level of evidenceLevel III, retrospective comparative study