Lisfranc injuries: Incidence, mechanisms of injury and predictors of instability

Studies directly comparing Lisfranc injuries treated with primary arthrodesis or open reduction and internal fixation show no significant difference in return to sport and complications: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Lisfranc injuries are common and can cause sport-ending morbidity. Management through primary arthrodesis (PA) or open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) is a subject of debate. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Web of Science databases were queried for studies assessing return to sport (RTS) outcomes following treatment of Lisfranc injuries with PA or ORIF. RTS rates, time to RTS, and complication rates were assessed. Maximum likelihood random-effects models were created based on comparative studies to evaluate differences in RTS and complication rates with odds ratios representing pooled estimates. Heterogeneity of return to sport outcomes was explored with sub-analysis of athlete level (non-elite vs. elite) and type of fixation. Across 23 studies, 603 Lisfranc injuries were identified; 498 underwent ORIF and 105 received PA. Return to sport ranged from 65 to 100 % in ORIF subjects and 67-100 % of PA subjects. Meta-analysis of comparative studies reveals no significant difference in likelihood of RTS or complications (p = 0.44 I2=26 %; p = 0.93 I2=0 %, respectively). RTS times range from 8 to 30 weeks for ORIF and 19.7-28.5 weeks for PA. Studies assessing RTS following ORIF and PA for Lisfranc injuries are heterogeneous, yet pooled data from comparative evidence suggests no significant difference in likelihood of RTS or complications. PA and ORIF have the potential for successful RTS though further prospective randomized studies are needed to better counsel athletes regarding the ideal surgical management for patient goals.

Semi-automated Segmentation and Distance Mapping of Weight Bearing CT Data to Estimate Select Midfoot Joint Volumes

BACKGROUND

Injury to the Lisfranc complex can prove difficult to diagnose, particularly injuries that are purely ligamentous. Missed Lisfranc injuries can cause long-lasting consequences including accelerated midfoot arthritis and collapse. Previous studies have investigated the volume and area of the space between the medial cuneiform and the second metatarsal, but the Lisfranc complex involves additional joints whose articulations have yet to be described. The objective of this study was to define volumes of each individual Lisfranc joint under physiological load to establish healthy baselines for clinical reference.

METHODS

Forty-three volunteers (54 feet) receiving a weightbearing computed tomography (CT) scan were included in this study. This cohort included 11 bilateral and 32 unilateral feet in patients that were scanned because of the presence of a contralateral ankle injury. The images were segmented using a semiautomated segmentation method. Opposing articular spaces in the Lisfranc joint of the midfoot were manually selected, and interarticular distance mapping was then performed to characterize the joint space width. Interarticular volume was then estimated using an area-weighted volume measurement.

RESULTS

All articulating surfaces within the tarsometatarsal region of the Lisfranc complex had a coefficient of variance below 30%, with the least variable region corresponding to the medial cuneiform-intermediate cuneiform articulating space (19.4%) and the most variable tarsometatarsal region corresponding to the medial cuneiform-second metatarsal (28.1%). Bilateral volunteers (n = 11) had nonsignificant contralateral differences in every articulating space within the Lisfranc complex except for the first metatarsal-medial cuneiform joint where we identified an average contralateral difference of 3.61 mm3, P = .03.

CONCLUSION

We present our data on using a semiautomatic algorithm to estimate volume of midfoot joints from weightbearing CT scan in a cohort of noninjured control subjects. Further studies determining if this algorithm may have clinical utility to help identify subtle Lisfranc instability are needed.

The utility of point-of-care dynamic ultrasonography for the diagnosis of subtle isolated ligamentous Lisfranc injuries: a cadaveric study

OBJECTIVES

To assess if Lisfranc injury can be detected by US with and without abduction stress.

METHODS

Eight cadaveric feet were obtained. The following measurements were obtained in the uninjured feet: C1M2 and C1C2 intervals and TMT1 and TMT2 dorsal step-off distances. Measurements were obtained both with and without abduction stress using ultrasound. The injury model was created by transecting the Lisfranc ligament complex, after which the observers performed the measurements again. Statistical analysis was used to identify differences between intact and injured models, to determine diagnostic cut-off values for identifying Lisfranc injuries, and to assess interobserver/intraobserver reliability.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference in the mean C1M2 interval, both with and without abduction stress, between the intact and torn Lisfranc ligament (p < 0.001). A C1M2 interval with stress of > 2.03 mm yielded 81% sensitivity and 72% specificity for Lisfranc disruption. There was no significant difference in the mean C1C2 interval of the torn versus intact Lisfranc ligament without stress (p = 0.10); however, the distance was significantly different with the application of stress (p < 0.001). The C1C2 interval of > 1.78 mm yielded 72% sensitivity and 69% specificity for Lisfranc injury under stress. There were no significant differences in the mean TMT1 or TMT2 dorsal step-off measurements between the intact and torn Lisfranc ligaments. All observers showed good intraobserver ICCs. The interobserver ICCs for all measurements were good or excellent, except for TMT1, which was moderate.

CONCLUSION

Ultrasonography is a promising point-of-care imaging tool to detect Lisfranc ligamentous injuries when measuring C1M2 and C1C2 distances under abduction stress.

Midfoot fractures: Patterns of injury and predictors of stability

Background

Lisfranc injuries describe a spectrum of midfoot and tarsometatarsal joint (TMTJ) trauma ranging from purely ligamentous to multiple fracture-dislocations. Lisfranc injuries represent 0.2 % of all fractures and are seen predictably, with mechanisms involving a fall from height, crushing, or torsion. Diagnosis can be challenging, with approximately 20 % of cases being missed, and relies upon clinical acumen and proficient image interpretation. Whilst multiple classification systems have described Lisfranc injuries using a 3-column concept, these add zero prognostic value and are therefore rarely used clinically. Furthermore, existing literature on diagnosis and management is limited to retrospective small series.

Methods

We present a review of 161 midfoot injuries, with the aim of highlighting characteristics of radiological instability and indication for operative management. CT scans and weight-bearing and non-weight-bearing X-rays were reviewed for features of joint instability. These features included metatarsal base, cuneiform and cuboid fractures, tarsometatarsal joint subluxation or dislocation and C1-MT2 diastasis. The subsequent "stable" and "unstable" injury groups were then compared to identify statistically significant indicators for instability.

Results

Avulsion and intra-articular fractures of the medial, middle, or lateral column were all suggestive of instability. Although these appeared in multiple combinations, 95 % involved the middle column. Concomitant inter-cuneiform and cuboid fractures were additional indicators of instability. In cases of uncertain midfoot instability, weight-bearing radiographs were of value with 14.2 % demonstrating a diastasis of C1-MT2 >2 mm.

Conclusion

We propose the need for a new classification of midfoot injuries which emphasises the diagnosis of instability and guides surgical management. We propose that, based on non-weight-bearing X-ray and CT scans, these injuries can be initially classified as "stable", "unstable", or "stability uncertain". Weight-bearing X-rays are a safe and reliable method of detecting instability in the "stability uncertain" group. Fractures of the medial column and cuneiform on initial imaging were suggestive of midfoot instability.

Epidemiology, classification, and treatment of 2084 Lisfranc injuries: An observational study from the Swedish fracture register

BACKGROUND

Lisfranc injuries are potentially severe but relatively uncommon. Limited epidemiological data regarding Lisfranc injuries of the midfoot are available. This study aimed to describe the injury's epidemiology, injury mechanism, and primary treatment.

METHODS

An observational register study examined all Lisfranc injuries registered in the Swedish Fracture Register from 2013 to 2022. Data on sex, age, date of injury, injury type, injury mechanism, and primary treatment were analysed.

RESULTS

Some 2084 Lisfranc injuries in 2079 patients (54 % men) were included in the study. The mean age at injury was 43 (18-92, SD 17.3) years for men and 49 (18-96, SD 17.4) for women. One of five cases were caused by high-energy trauma, and the most common injury mechanism was a simple fall - tripping (31 %). Approximately 39 % of patients underwent operative treatment, with fixation using plates (51 %) being the prevailing choice of treatment. Primary arthrodesis was performed in 11 % of the operatively treated cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Lisfranc injuries are the consequence of a broad spectrum of injury mechanisms, are primarily induced by low-energy trauma and found in all age groups in adults. The majority of Lisfranc injuries are treated non-operatively. This comprehension can aid in accurate diagnosis and management in everyday clinical practice.

Acute Lisfranc injury management

Lisfranc injuries were previously described as fracture-dislocations of the tarsometatarsal joints. With advancements in modern imaging, subtle Lisfranc injuries are now more frequently recognized, revealing that their true incidence is much higher than previously thought. Injury patterns can vary widely in severity and anatomy. Early diagnosis and treatment are essential to achieve good outcomes. The original classification systems were anatomy-based, and limited as tools for guiding treatment. The current review, using the best available evidence, instead introduces a stability-based classification system, with weightbearing radiographs and CT serving as key diagnostic tools. Stable injuries generally have good outcomes with nonoperative management, most reliably treated with immobilization and non-weightbearing for six weeks. Displaced or comminuted injuries require surgical intervention, with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) being the most common approach, with a consensus towards bridge plating. While ORIF generally achieves satisfactory results, its effectiveness can vary, particularly in high-energy injuries. Primary arthrodesis remains niche for the treatment of acute injuries, but may offer benefits such as lower rates of post-traumatic arthritis and hardware removal. Novel fixation techniques, including suture button fixation, aim to provide flexible stabilization, which theoretically could improve midfoot biomechanics and reduce complications. Early findings suggest promising functional outcomes, but further studies are required to validate this method compared with established techniques. Future research should focus on refining stability-based classification systems, validation of weightbearing CT, improving rehabilitation protocols, and optimizing surgical techniques for various injury patterns to ultimately enhance patient outcomes.

Defining Operative Indications in Lisfranc Injuries: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review was to determine operative indications for Lisfranc injuries.

METHODS

A systematic review using a MEDLINE literature search was performed using the index "Lisfranc Injury" from 1980 onward using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines where applicable. Inclusion criteria were all clinical studies reporting on the management of Lisfranc injuries obtained via the search index, including case reports, review articles, cohort studies, and randomized trials. Non-English-language articles, inaccessible articles, those not relevant to the management of Lisfranc injuries (biomechanical, cadaveric, and technique articles), and those that did not explicitly state operative indications (vague or absent indications) were excluded.

RESULTS

After identifying 737 studies, the full text of 391 studies was reviewed, and 58 reports providing explicit operative indications were included in the final analysis. Fifty-one (81.1%) studies provided diastasis cutoffs varying ≥2 mm (35/58; 60.4%), ≥1 mm (13; 22.4%), and ≥3 mm (3; 5.2%); the diastasis location was most commonly unspecified (31/58; 53.5%) or varied between combinations of metatarsal, tarsal, cuboid, and cuneiform bones (20/58; 27.6%). Specific imaging criteria for surgery included an avulsion fracture or fleck sign (3/58; 5.2%), arch height loss (3/58; 5.2%), and a tear on magnetic resonance imaging (5; 8.6%). The 11 (19%) studies defining operative indications in terms of classification schemes used the Nunley and Vertullo (8/58; 13.8%), Myerson (2; 3.5%), and Buehren (1; 1.7%) systems. Twenty-one (36.2%) studies provided multiple operative indications.

CONCLUSION

The most common Lisfranc operative indications among the limited reporting studies varied from a 1- to 3-mm diastasis across several locations. It is imperative for operative indications to be reported with an increased frequency and in a homogenous fashion to guide the clinical management of these subtle injuries.

LEVELS OF EVIDENCE

Level IV; systematic Review.

High risk and low incidence diseases: Lisfranc injury

INTRODUCTION

Lisfranc injuries are uncommon but frequently misdiagnosed and carry a high rate of morbidity.

OBJECTIVE

This review highlights the pearls and pitfalls of Lisfranc injuries, including presentation, diagnosis, and management in the emergency department (ED) based on current evidence.

DISCUSSION

Lisfranc injuries are caused by high- or low-energy trauma to the tarsometatarsal (TMT) joint complex. The severity of injury exists on a spectrum, ranging from minor subluxations to fractures and dislocations involving the TMT joint complex. They can be complicated by compartment syndrome, neurovascular compromise, and open fractures. Prompt diagnosis is critical in preventing chronic pain and mobility challenges, as even small subluxations can result in significant morbidity. Lisfranc injuries should be considered in all patients with a foot injury. Patients with Lisfranc injuries most commonly present with midfoot pain, swelling, or ecchymosis. Despite the importance of a timely diagnosis, Lisfranc injuries are commonly missed on plain radiographs due to their often subtle findings. When x-rays are negative but there is significant clinical suspicion, emergency clinicians should obtain advanced imaging such as computed tomography to aid in diagnosis. All Lisfranc injuries should be discussed with orthopedic surgery to determine definitive management. Patients who can be discharged should be made non-weightbearing and placed in a short-leg splint.

CONCLUSION

The consideration of Lisfranc injuries can help emergency clinicians make a timely diagnosis to prevent future complications.

Evaluating the Validity and Reliability of the Persian Version of American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society Midfoot Scale

BACKGROUND

The use of a valid and reliable outcome scoring system is crucial for evaluating the result of different treatment interventions. The aims of this study were to translate and culturally adapt the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot scoring system into the Persian language and assess its validity and reliability.

METHOD

In total, 57 patients with midfoot injuries were enrolled. Forward-backward translation and cultural adaptation methods were used to develop the Persian version of AOFAS midfoot scoring system. Reliability and internal consistency were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cronbach's alpha. The discriminant and convergent validities of the scoring system were assessed using the total score of the mental and physical component of SF-36.

RESULTS

The mean age of the participants was 46.2 ± 16.3 years. The intra-observer reliability of the totals core of the Persian version of AOFAS midfoot scoring system was 0.96 (confidence interval [CI]: 0.92-0.97) and the inter-observer reliability of the scoring system was 0.90 (CI: 0.86-0.95). The Persian version of AOFAS midfoot scoring system had acceptable convergence with physical component scoring system of SF-36 and its subscales (0.57); moreover, it had acceptable discriminant validity with the mental component of SF-36 and its subscales (0.36).

CONCLUSION

The Persian version of AOFAS midfoot is a reliable and valid instrument and could be used by Persian language clinicians and researchers.

LEVEL OF CLINICAL EVIDENCE

3.

Primary Arthrodesis or Open Reduction and Internal Fixation for Lisfranc Injuries: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Lisfranc injuries are often managed surgically with primary arthrodesis (PA) or open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF); however, neither approach has been shown to be superior. This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the functional and surgical outcomes of PA and ORIF in the treatment of Lisfranc injuries.

Methods

This study was performed as per the PRISMA protocol. Database searches were conducted on Cochrane, Embase, and PubMed libraries. Five RCTs were identified for inclusion involving 241 patients, of which 121 underwent PA and 120 underwent ORIF.

Results

Statistically significant differences in visual analog scale pain score at 2 years (mean difference 0.89, 95% CI 0.18-1.59), patient satisfaction (OR 10.04, 95% CI 1.78-56.76), and all-cause return to surgery (OR 27.31, 95% CI 12.72-58.63) were observed, all favoring PA. There were no statistically significant differences between PA and ORIF with regard to American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society midfoot scores at 2 years, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) scores, and unplanned return to surgery.

Conclusion

This study showed significant improvement in pain at 2 years, patient satisfaction, and all-cause return to surgery favoring PA in all instances. Given ORIF often necessitates a second operation for hardware removal, it is to be expected that all-cause return to surgery is higher in ORIF groups. Overall, these results do not have the power to confer an advantage to a particular approach because of significant heterogeneity. Further studies should focus on larger patient cohorts and longer follow-up, or analysis stratified by patient demographics and injury presentation. In the absence of clinically significant differences, cost-benefit analyses should be considered to answer the question of whether to "fix or fuse" for Lisfranc injuries.

Weightbearing Computed Tomography Can Accurately Detect Subtle Lisfranc Injury

BACKGROUND

Early detection of Lisfranc injury is critical for improving clinical outcomes, but diagnosing subtle injury can be difficult. Weightbearing computed tomography (WBCT) allows evaluation of such injuries in 3 dimensions (3D) under physiologic load. This study aimed to assess the utility of 1-, 2-, and 3-dimensional measurements on WBCT to diagnose subtle injury in isolated ligamentous Lisfranc injuries.

METHODS

Ten cadaveric specimens underwent WBCT evaluation of the Lisfranc joint complex in the intact state and subsequently with sequential sectioning of the dorsal Lisfranc ligament and interosseous Lisfranc ligament (IOL) to create subtle Lisfranc injury, and finally after transectioning of plantar Lisfranc ligament (PLL) to create the injury conditions for complete ligamentous Lisfranc injury. Measurements under static vertical tibial load of 80 kg were performed on WBCT images including (1) Lisfranc joint (medial cuneiform-base of second metatarsal) volume, (2) Lisfranc joint area, (3) C1-C2 intercuneiform area, (4) C1-M2 distance, (5) C1-C2 distance, (6) M1-M2 intermetatarsal distance, (7) first tarsometatarsal (TMT1) alignment, (8) second tarsometatarsal (TMT2) alignment, (9) TMT1 dorsal step-off distance, and (10) TMT2 dorsal step-off distance.

RESULTS

In the subtle Lisfranc injury state, Lisfranc joint volume and area, C1-M2 distance, and M1-M2 distance measurements on WBCT significantly increased, when compared with the intact state (P values .001 to .014). Additionally, Lisfranc joint volume and area, C1-M2 distance, M1-M2 distance, TMT2 alignment, and TMT2 dorsal step-off measurements were increased in the complete Lisfranc injury state. Of all measurements, C1-M2 distance had the largest area under the curve (AUC) of 0.96 (sensitivity = 90%; specificity = 90%), followed by Lisfranc volume (AUC = 0.90; sensitivity = 80%; specificity = 80%) and Lisfranc area (AUC = 0.89; sensitivity = 80%; specificity = 100%).

CONCLUSION

In a cadaveric model we found that WBCT scan can increase the diagnostic accuracy for subtle Lisfranc injury. Among the measurements, C1-M2 distance exhibited the highest level of accuracy. The 2D joint area and 3D joint volume also proved to be accurate, with 3D volume measurements of the Lisfranc joint displaying the most significant absolute difference between the intact state and increasing severity of Lisfranc injury. These findings suggest that 2D joint area and 3D joint volume may have potential as supplementary measurements to more accurately diagnose subtle Lisfranc injuries.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

WBCT may help surgeons detect subtle Lisfranc injuries.

[Lisfranc injuries]

Lisfranc injuries are rare but severe injuries of the foot. They range from ligament sprain to complex fracture dislocations. Etiologically, a distinction is made between indirect and direct force and between high-energy and low-energy trauma. Inadequate diagnostics (injuries overlooked or misinterpreted) can lead to painful posttraumatic osteoarthritis, chronic instability and deformity of the foot. A fracture, malalignment and unclear findings in conventional radiological diagnostics necessitate computed tomography imaging including 3D reconstruction. Lisfranc injuries are often associated with accompanying pathologies of the foot that also need to be addressed. Only stable non-displaced fractures can be treated conservatively. Depending on the injury pattern, surgical treatment is performed percutaneously, minimally invasive or open. The prognosis following Lisfranc injury is determined by the severity of damage and the quality of reconstruction.

Cone-beam computed tomography imaging and three-dimensional analysis of midfoot joints during non-weightbearing and weightbearing in 11 healthy feet

BACKGROUND

Studies report that Lisfranc injury is more common than thought. Several imaging methods for assessing the stability of Lisfranc injury have been described but many are impossible to standardize and not accurate enough.

PURPOSE

To present a three-dimensional (3D) method for analyzing the changes in the joint space width of the midfoot joint and the joints of the medial part of the Lisfranc complex in healthy individuals.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Non-weightbearing and weightbearing cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images of 11 healthy feet were acquired and analyzed with 3D software. The mean range of joint space width changes of each joint was computed from the changes in individual image pairs.

RESULTS

3D analysis software was used to analyze the medial part of the Lisfranc complex. In this sample of healthy feet, the changes in the joint spaces in the medial part of Lisfranc complex, calculated with 3D analysis software, was less than 0.6 mm. The distance between bones increased or decreased, depending on which part of the joint surface the measurements were taken.

CONCLUSION

In this study, we present a 3D analysis method to evaluate midfoot joint space width changes. Our analysis revealed that in healthy feet there are only minimal changes in the joint space width between weightbearing and non-weightbearing indicating minimal movement of the midtarsal joints. The 3D analysis of weightbearing CBCT data provides a promising tool for analyzing the small midfoot joints in a variety of conditions.

Open Reduction Internal Fixation vs Primary Arthrodesis for Displaced Lisfranc Injuries: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus whether the primary surgical method should be open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) or primary arthrodesis (PA) for Lisfranc injuries. The aim of our randomized controlled trial was to compare ORIF and PA for displaced Lisfranc injuries.

METHODS

This study was a national multicenter randomized controlled trial. Altogether 43 displaced Lisfranc injuries were enrolled in this trial. The primary outcome measure was Visual Analogue Scale Foot and Ankle (VAS-FA) at a 24-months follow-up. The secondary outcome measures were VAS-FA pain, function, and other complaints subscales and the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) Midfoot Scale. All outcomes were measured at 6, 12, and 24 months. We were unable to reach the planned sample size of 60 patients; thus, the study remains underpowered.

RESULTS

The mean VAS-FA Overall score in the ORIF group was 86.5 (95% CI 77.9, 95.1) and 80.1 (95% CI 72.0, 88.1) in the PA group at the 24-month follow-up. We did not find eligible evidence of a difference in VAS-FA Overall scores (mean between-group difference 6.5 [95% CI -5.3, 18.2], Cohen d = 0.100).

CONCLUSION

We did not find evidence of a difference in VAS-FA between ORIF and PA in patients with displaced Lisfranc injuries, and thus both are viable options for the initial surgical method. The trial is underpowered; however, the data may be included in a meta-analysis of similarly designed randomized controlled trials.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02953067 24 October 2016.

Complications and Outcomes After Fixation of Lisfranc Injuries at an Urban Level 1 Trauma Center

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate patients with tarsometatarsal fractures and dislocations and describe complications and secondary operations.

METHODS

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Level 1 trauma center.

PATIENT SELECTION CRITERIA

Consecutive adults treated acutely for Lisfranc injuries with reduction and fixation using standard techniques of rigid medial fixation and flexible lateral fixation.

OUTCOME MEASURES AND COMPARISONS

Complications include infections, wound healing problems, nonunion, malunion, and posttraumatic arthrosis (PTA), and secondary unplanned procedures after a minimum of 2-year radiographic follow-up.

RESULTS

Mean age of the included 118 patients was 40 years (range, 18-73 years) and 96 (74%) were male. Comorbidities included obesity (n = 32; 40%), diabetes mellitus (n = 12; 9%), and tobacco use (n = 67; 52%). Thirty (23%) were open injuries, and concomitant forefoot injuries were present in 47% and hindfoot injuries in 12%. Unplanned secondary procedures, including implant removals, were performed on 39 patients (33%), most often for removal of painful implants (26%) or infectious debridement (9%). Sixty-seven complications occurred, with PTA most frequent (37%). Deep infections occurred in 8%. On multivariate analysis, open injury ( P = 0.028, CI = 1.22-30.63, OR = 6.12) and concomitant forefoot injury ( P = 0.03, CI = 1.12-9.76, OR = 3.31) were independent risk factors for complication.

CONCLUSIONS

Open Lisfranc injuries were associated with complications, with deep infections occurring in 9%. Secondary procedures were most often performed for pain relief; the most common late complication was PTA, warranting counseling of patients about potential long-term sequelae of injury.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Nonunion Rate Following Primary Arthrodesis for Acute Lisfranc Injuries

Injury to the tarsometatarsal joint (TMT) results in instability throughout the midfoot that does not often improve with conservative management. If instability is identified, surgical intervention is frequently recommended, either open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) or primary arthrodesis (PA). These 2 treatment options have been compared in the literature multiple times, often reporting similar outcomes. Due to this, as well as the need for subsequent hardware removal after ORIF has led many surgeons towards PA at the index surgery. Concern for nonunion is a leading concern with surgeons who advocate instead for ORIF. The purpose of this study is to review patients who underwent PA and observe nonunion rates. Nonunion at the TMT has been previously studied, but only in the chronic setting. We performed a retrospective study of 34 patients who had PA in the management of an acute Lisfranc injury. The average age in our study was 43.9 years old (range 19-72, SD 17.4) with an average follow-up of 9.4 months (range 4-33, SD 6.2). Radiographs were evaluated for signs of nonunion at regular postoperative intervals. Within the patients included in the study, a total of 71 TMT joints were fused. Overall successful fusion rate was 95.8% at an average of 7.9 weeks (range 6-12, SD 1.4) postoperatively. Individual nonunion rates at the first, second, and third TMT were 0%, 1.4% and 2.8% respectively. Our study demonstrates that primary arthrodesis provides a predictable outcome with low nonunion rates in the management of acute Lisfranc injury.

Augmented Stress Weight-bearing CT for Evaluation of Subtle Lisfranc Injuries in the Elite Athlete

BACKGROUND

Lisfranc injuries refer to a disruption or displacement of the tarsometatarsal joint of the foot. Subtle Lisfranc injuries can go undiagnosed on conventional imaging leading to devastating consequences and poor functional outcomes for elite athletes. Objective. The objective of this case study is to present a novel imaging technique using weight-bearing computed tomography (CT) with enhanced stress to identify subtle, dynamically unstable Lisfranc injuries. We illustrate this with a case presentation of an elite athlete who ultimately required surgical fixation for a subtle Lisfranc injury.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

To perform an augmented stress weight-bearing CT, the patient was positioned standing, with their feet facing forward, and weight equally distributed. The patient was then coached to symmetrically raise both heels from the scanner platform. This plantarflexion provided augmented stress on the midfoot, allowing for more sensitive imaging of the Lisfranc injury. The weight-bearing CT and augmented stress images undergo 3D reconstruction and postprocessing to render coronal and sagittal images, allowing for comparison of the standard weight-bearing and augmented stress images.

RESULTS

We present the case of a 22-year-old collegiate football lineman sustaining a Lisfranc injury. The injury diagnosis was made by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and clinical examination, without evidence of injury on weight-bearing XR or standard weight-bearing CT. With augmented stress CT imaging, the Lisfranc instability was noted, leading to surgical fixation, and return to sport the next season.

CONCLUSION

We propose this technique for diagnosing subtle, unstable Lisfranc injuries where clinical suspicion persists despite inconclusive imaging, particularly in elite athletes. Further research is needed with larger sample sizes to investigate the sensitivity of this novel imaging technique for the detection of Lisfranc injury.

LEVELS OF EVIDENCE

Level 4: Case Report.

Statistical Fragility Analysis of Open Reduction Internal Fixation vs Primary Arthrodesis to Treat Lisfranc Injuries: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of consensus in the use of open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) vs primary arthrodesis (PA) in the management of Lisfranc injuries. Statistical fragility represents the number of events needed to flip statistical significance and provides context to interpret P values of outcomes from conflicting studies. The current study evaluates the statistical fragility of existing research with an outcome-specific approach to provide statistical clarity to the ORIF vs PA discussion. We hypothesized that statistical fragility analysis would offer clinically relevant insight when interpreting conflicting outcomes regarding ORIF vs PA management of Lisfranc injuries.

METHODS

All comparative studies, RCTs, and case-series investigating ORIF vs PA management of Lisfranc injuries published through October 5, 2023, were identified. Descriptive characteristics, dichotomous outcomes, and continuous outcomes were extracted. Fragility index and continuous fragility index were calculated by the number of event reversals needed to alter significance. Outcomes were categorized by clinical relevance, and median FI and CFI were reported.

RESULTS

A total of 244 studies were screened. Ten studies and 67 outcomes (44 dichotomous, 23 continuous) were included in the fragility analysis. Of the 10 studies, 4 studies claimed PA to correlate with superior outcomes compared to ORIF with regard to functional scores and return to function outcomes. Of these 4 studies, 3 were statistically robust. Six studies claimed PA and ORIF to have no differences in outcomes, in which only 2 studies were statistically robust.

CONCLUSION

The overall research regarding ORIF vs PA is relatively robust compared with other orthopaedic areas of controversy. Although the full statistical context of each article must be considered, studies supporting PA superiority with regard to functional scores and return to function metrics were found to be statistically robust. Outcome-specific analysis revealed moderate fragility in several clinically relevant outcomes such as functional score, return to function, and wound complications.

Mechanism of Injury for Traumatic Mid-Foot Lisfranc Injuries: Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background During the COVID-19 pandemic, Americans transitioned away from their normal routines, drove in motor vehicles less, and reduced their physical activity, ultimately influencing the incidence and nature of orthopedic injuries that were operatively managed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown and subsequent deconditioning on the mechanism of injury and severity of Lisfranc injury. Methods This retrospective study included patients with a traumatic Lisfranc injury who were surgically treated by a foot and ankle fellowship-trained orthopedic surgeon between 2015 and 2021. Electronic health records were queried for patient demographics, mechanism of injury, physical exam findings, and pain scores. Preoperative radiographs were reviewed to grade Lisfranc injuries using the previously described Nunley-Vertullo classification system. Descriptive and univariate statistics were performed to compare 15 patients in the pre-COVID-19 cohort and 15 patients in the post-COVID-19 cohort. Results In the pre-COVID-19 cohort, 80% (n=12/15) of the patients were female, the mean age was 46±15 years, the mean BMI was 29.7±7 kg/m2, and the mean follow-up period was 18.1±12 months. In the post-COVID-19 cohort, 53% (n=8/15) of the patients were female, the mean age was 48.5±17 years, the mean BMI was 31.4±7 kg/m2, and the mean follow-up period was 9.5±4 months. Significantly higher proportions of plantar ecchymosis (n=8/15, 53%), neuropathic pain (n=7/15, 47%), and swelling (n=12/15, 80%) were present in the post-COVID-19 cohort. A low-energy mechanism of injury was sustained by 73% (n=11/15) of the pre-COVID-19 cohort and 80% (n=12/15) of the post-COVID-19 cohort. Lisfranc injuries for the pre-COVID-19 cohort and the post-COVID-19 cohort demonstrated the following classifications: Grade 1 (33%, n=5/15 vs. 40%, n=6/15), Grade 2 (60%, n=9/15 vs. 53%, n=8/15), and Grade 3 (7%, n=1/15 vs. 7%, n=1/15). Conclusion Although a higher proportion of plantar ecchymosis, neuropathic pain, and swelling was observed, there was no association between a low mechanism of injury and a higher grade of Lisfranc injury following the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Use of Dorsal Bridge Plate Fixation in the Operative Management of Lisfranc Injuries - A Retrospective Cohort Study at Medium Term Follow-Up

INTRODUCTION

Traditionally, early surgical management of Lisfranc injuries with transarticular screws (TAS) was deemed to be the optimal treatment. However, concerns of potential iatrogenic articular cartilage disruption has led to discrepancies in opinion amongst surgeons, with many surgeons now utilizing dorsal bridge plates (DBP) for ORIF of Lisfranc injuries.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to investigate the clinical outcomes at medium-term follow-up of consecutive patients in our institution who underwent ORIF with DBP for Lisfranc injuries.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent ORIF with DBPs for Lisfranc injuries were identified. Outcomes of interest included; visual analogue scale (VAS), functional foot index (FFI), American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Surgeons (AOFAS) hindfoot scores, and complications.

RESULTS

Overall, 37 consecutive patients (24 males) with a mean age of 34.8 ± 13.0 years underwent ORIF with DBPs for lisfranc injuries. After a mean 48.3 ± 28.7 months, the mean reported AOFAS and FFI scores were 77.4 ± 23.8 and 31.9 ± 32.7 respectively, with satisfactory reported pain scores as measured by VAS post-operatively at rest and whilst walking (2.2 ± 2.5 and 3.1 ± 2.6 respectively). The reported satisfaction rate was 86.5% (32/37). Overall, 25 patients (67.6%) had subsequent removal of metal or were listed for same, 88% (22/25) of whom did so electively in the absence of broken screws or infection.

CONCLUSION

This study found that the use of Dorsal Bridge Plates for Open Reduction and Internal Fixation of Lisfranc Injuries resulted in satisfactory functional outcomes, high rates of patient-reported satisfaction and a low complication rate at medium-term follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV; Retrospective Series of Consecutive Patients.

Outcomes of Surgically Treated Purely Ligamentous Stage II Lisfranc Injuries

BACKGROUND

Low-energy stage II Lisfranc injuries are rare, and treatment can be operative or nonoperative based on a surgeon's assessment of midfoot stability. No previously published patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) data for Lisfranc injuries isolates purely ligamentous stage II injuries. The purpose of this study was to analyze PROMs for patients who underwent operative management of stage II Lisfranc injuries.

METHODS

Thirty-nine patients (39 feet) with confirmed Nunley-Vertullo stage II Lisfranc injuries between May 2012 and February 2022 were identified through a retrospective chart review. PROMs that were analyzed were the visual analog scale (VAS) pain scale, Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12), Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM), and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

Thirty-two open reduction internal fixations (ORIFs) and 7 fusions were performed. The mean latest follow-up was 44.6 (range, 12-92) months. There were 2 complications (5%, 2/39) that required a revision procedure. Twenty-six patients (67%, 26/39) underwent secondary surgery to remove retained hardware. The mean time to hardware removal was 3.97 (range, 2.70-7.47) months. The overall mean patient satisfaction score with overall medical care including clinical visits and interactions with medical staff personnel was 93.6/100. All PROMs (VAS, VR-12, FAAM) demonstrated statistically significant improvement (P < .05) from preoperative (injury) values to latest follow-up postinjury values.

CONCLUSION

Patients who were treated surgically with stage II purely ligamentous Lisfranc injuries via the methods used were found to mostly undergo hardware removal and have high levels of overall satisfaction with their process of medical care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, retrospective case series.

Suspensory Device Fixation of Lisfranc Injuries in a Southeast Asian Urban Population: Patient-Reported Functional Outcomes

Introduction Open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) and primary arthrodesis are two conventional options for the treatment of Lisfranc injuries. However, they are associated with implant-related complications. An alternative suspensory device construct using interosseous nonabsorbable sutures with endobuttons has been described with satisfactory results. This study aims to explore functional outcomes after suture button fixation of Lisfranc injuries in a Southeast Asian population. Methods This was a single-surgeon retrospective study of patients with Lisfranc injuries treated surgically using a suture button fixation technique between 2017 and 2019. Data collected included demographic information, pre-injury levels of activity, nature of injury, and type of surgery performed. The minimum postoperative follow-up was one year. The Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) and Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) were used to evaluate patient-reported outcomes. Scores were reported in percentage (%) with median and interquartile range. Results Twenty-nine patients with a mean age of 29 years (21-76) were recruited. Sixteen underwent suture button fixation only (SB), and 13 underwent suture button fixation with intercuneiform screw fixation and plating (SBM). The median scores for the FAOS and FAAM questionnaires were at least 80% in all domains. Twenty-eight patients (97%) were able to return to pre-injury activity level, 27 patients (93%) were able to return to sports. Only one patient was not satisfied with the outcomes of surgery. No patients had post-traumatic arthritis or hardware failure necessitating implant removal at the final follow-up. Conclusion This study has demonstrated that treatment of Lisfranc injuries with a suspensory device construct resulted in good outcomes with 97% of patients being able to return to pre-injury activity levels, and 93% of patients being able to return to sports. It may not be necessary to perform primary arthrodesis in uncomplicated Lisfranc injuries. This technique is also advantageous as implant removal is not routinely required due to the design and biomechanical properties of suspensory devices.

Weightbearing Computed Tomography vs Conventional Tomography for Examination of Varying Degrees of Lisfranc Injures: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Background

Lisfranc injuries, if not accurately diagnosed, can result in chronic pain and instability. Previous studies have examined ultrasonographs, radiographs, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and conventional computed tomography (CT) scan to differentiate Lisfranc instability, but they focused on a healthy/injured scale without differentiating subtle injury. Weightbearing CT (WBCT) has emerged as a diagnostic tool for detecting subtle Lisfranc injuries. This systematic review aimed to compare WBCT with conventional CT in diagnosing Lisfranc injury, and the ability to differentiate injuries of varying severities.

Methods

The review encompassed PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science databases from inception until July 5, 2023. Inclusion criteria involved studies on CT and/or WBCT for Lisfranc injuries and nonoperative studies. Exclusion criteria composed case reports, commentaries, postoperative imaging studies, pediatric patients, studies with nonobjective radiographic measurements, studies exclusively focused on injury classification, and studies with fewer than 5 patients because of poor statistical power. Data extraction focused on radiographic measurements of the Lisfranc complex, categorized into conventional CT, partial WBCT, and total WBCT.

Results

Out of the initially retrieved 489 articles, 9 met the inclusion criteria. Several studies consistently demonstrate that WBCT provides a higher level of accuracy in measuring the Lisfranc area, offering enhanced sensitivity to detect subtle alterations in joint structure. Moreover, WBCT exhibits superior sensitivity in distinguishing between healthy Lisfranc joints and those with injuries, particularly when identifying dorsal ligament damage. This imaging modality allows for the detection of significant variations in critical measurements like first-second metatarsal (M1-M2) distance, first cuneiform (C1)-M2 distance, and joint volumes, enabling a more comprehensive assessment of Lisfranc joint health especially with subtle instability.

Conclusion

This review evaluates the extant literature on WBCT's utility in diagnosing Lisfranc injuries and compares its effectiveness to CT in distinguishing between injuries of varying severity. WBCT, with reliable measurement techniques, appears more adept at detecting subtle Lisfranc instability compared to CT, likely by allowing the assessment of injury under load.

Societal burden and quality of life in patients with Lisfranc Injuries

BACKGROUND

The incidence of Lisfranc fractures is rising, along with the incidence of foot fractures in general. These injuries can lead to long-term healthcare use and societal costs. Current economic evaluation studies are scarce in Lisfranc fracture research, and only investigate the healthcare costs. The aim of the present study was to accurately measure the monetary societal burden of disease and quality of life in the first 6 months after the injury in patients with Lisfranc fractures in the Netherlands.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study used a prevalence-based, bottom-up approach. Patients were included through thirteen medical centres in the Netherlands. Both stable and unstable injuries were included. The societal perspective was used. The costs were measured at baseline, 12 weeks and 6 months using the iMTA MCQ and PCQ questionnaires. Reference prices were used for valuation. Quality-of-life was measured using the EQ-5D-5 L and VAS scores.

RESULTS

214 patients were included. The mean age was 45.9 years, and 24.3% of patients had comorbidities. The baseline questionnaires yielded approximately €2023 as the total societal costs in the 3 months prior to injury. The follow-up questionnaires and surgery costs assessment yielded approximately €17,083 as the total costs in the first 6 months after injury. Of these costs, approximately two thirds could be attributed to productivity losses. The EQ-5D-5 L found a mean index value of 0.449 at baseline and an index value of 0.737 at the 6-month follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The total monetary societal costs in the first 6 months after injury are approximately €17,083. Approximately two thirds of these costs can be attributed to productivity losses. These costs appear to be somewhat higher than those found in other studies. However, these studies only included the healthcare costs. Furthermore, the baseline costs indicate relatively low healthcare usage before the injury compared to the average Dutch patient. The mean QoL index was 0.462 at baseline and 0.737 at 6 months, indicating a rise in QoL after treatment as well as a long-lasting impact on QoL. To our knowledge, this is only the first study investigating the societal costs of Lisfranc injuries, so more research is needed.

Morphologic analysis of the 1st and 2nd tarsometatarsal joint articular surfaces

Tarsometatarsal joint arthrodesis is used to treat a variety of injuries and deformities in the midfoot. However, the surgical technique has not been optimized, in part due to limited knowledge of morphologic features and variation in the related joints. Previous research has relied primarily on dissection-based anatomical analysis, but quantitative imaging may allow for a more sophisticated description of this complex. Here, we used quantitative micro-CT imaging to examine dimensions, distance maps, and curvature of the four articular surfaces in the first and second tarsometatarsal joints. Image segmentation, articular surface identification, and anatomic coordinate systems were all done with semi or fully automatic methods, and distance and size measurements were all taken utilizing these anatomic planes. Surface curvature was studied using Gaussian curvature and a newly defined measure of curvature similarity on the whole joint and on four subregions of each surface. These data show larger articular surfaces on the cuneiforms, rather than metatarsals, and define the generally tall and narrow articular surfaces seen in these joints. Curvature analysis shows minimally curved opposing convex surfaces. Our results are valuable for furthering knowledge of surgical anatomy in this poorly understood region of the foot.

Management of Lisfranc Injuries: A Critical Analysis Review

»

There is a spectrum of midtarsal injuries, ranging from mild midfoot sprains to complex Lisfranc fracture-dislocations.

»

Use of appropriate imaging can reduce patient morbidity, by reducing the number of missed diagnoses and, conversely, avoiding overtreatment. Weight-bearing radiographs are of great value when investigating the so-called subtle Lisfranc injury.

»

Regardless of the operative strategy, anatomical reduction and stable fixation is a prerequisite for a satisfactory outcome in the management of displaced injuries.

»

Fixation device removal is less frequently reported after primary arthrodesis compared with open reduction and internal fixation based on 6 published meta-analyses. However, the indications for further surgery are often unclear, and the evidence of the included studies is of typically low quality. Further high-quality prospective randomized trials with robust cost-effectiveness analyses are required in this area.

»

We have proposed an investigation and treatment algorithm based on the current literature and clinical experience of our trauma center.

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.

Is the diagnostic validity of conventional radiography for Lisfranc injury acceptable?

BACKGROUND

Lisfranc injuries mainly involve the tarsometatarsal joint complex and are commonly misdiagnosed or missed in clinical settings. Most medical institutions prefer to use conventional radiography. However, existing studies on conventional radiographs in Lisfranc injury lack a large population-based sample, influencing the validity of the results. We aimed to determine the diagnostic validity and reliability of conventional radiography for Lisfranc injury and whether computed tomography can alter clinical decision-making.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 307 patients with, and 100 patients without, Lisfranc injury from January 2017 to December 2019. Diagnosis was confirmed using computed tomography. A senior and junior surgeon independently completed two assessments of the same set of anonymised conventional radiographs at least 3 months apart. The surgeons were then asked to suggest one of two treatment options (surgery or conservative treatment) for each case based on the radiographs and subsequently on the CT images.

RESULTS

All inter- and intra-observer reliabilities were moderate to very good (all κ coefficients > 0.4). The mean (range) true positive rate was 81.8% (73.9%-87.0%), true negative rate was 90.0% (85.0%-94.0%), false positive rate was 10.0% (6.0%-15.0%), false negative rate was 18.2% (13.0%-26.1%), positive predictive value was 96.1% (93.8%-97.8%), negative predictive value was 62.4% (51.5%-69.7%), classification accuracy was 83.8% (76.7%-88.2%), and balanced error rate was 14.1% (10.2%-20.5%). Three-column injuries were most likely to be recognized (mean rate, 92.1%), followed by intermediate-lateral-column injuries (mean rate, 81.5%). Medial-column injuries were relatively difficult to identify (mean rate, 60.7%). The diagnostic rate for non-displaced injuries (mean rate, 76.7%) was lower than that for displaced injuries (mean rate, 95.5%). The typical examples are given. A significant difference between the two surgeons was found in the recognition rate of non-displaced injuries (p = 0.005). The mean alteration rate was 21.9%; the senior surgeon tended to a lower rate (15.6%) than the junior one (28.3%) (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The sensitivity, specificity, and classification accuracy of conventional radiographs for Lisfranc injury were 81.8%, 90.0%, and 83.8%, respectively. Three-column or displaced injuries were most likely to be recognized. The possibility of changing the initial treatment decision after subsequently evaluating computed tomography images was 21.9%. The diagnostic and clinical decision-making of surgeons with different experience levels demonstrated some degree of variability. Protected weight-bearing and a further CT scan should be considered if a Lisfranc injury is suspected and conventional radiography is negative.

Defining Reference Values for the Normal Adult Lisfranc Joint Using Weightbearing Computed Tomography

The uninjured contralateral feet of consecutive patients undergoing cone-beam weightbearing computed tomography for acute Lisfranc injury between July 2017 and October 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Of these, any cases with history or radiological evidence of trauma to the Lisfranc interval were excluded. The area of the non-weightbearing (NWBA) and weightbearing (WBA) Lisfranc joint was calculated (in mm²) using a novel technique. Area difference (AD) was calculated as WBA-NWBA. Area ratio (AR) was calculated as WBA/NWBA. A subset of cases was double-measured by 2 technologists to evaluate inter- and intraobserver variability. A total of 91 patients aged 15 to 74 years were included in the study. The measurement technique was reproducible with excellent intraobserver correlation (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]: 0.998, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.996-0.999) and high interobserver correlation (ICC: 0.964, CI: 0.939-0.979). The median NWBA was 83 (range 52-171) and median WBA was 86 (range 52-171). Median AD was 1 mm² (range -3 to 10) and median AR was 1.01 (range 0.96-1.11). No significant difference was identified in AD or AR when adjusted for age, gender, patient-weight or weight put through the foot. Both AD and AR distributions were highly skewed toward 0 and 1, respectively. Based on 95% CI, normal reference range for AD is -1 to 7 mm² and for AR is 0.98 to 1.09. Absolute area of the Lisfranc joint is highly variable between individuals. The Lisfranc joint is rigid with little to no physiologic widening in most subjects. The normal upper limit of widening of the Lisfranc area on weightbearing was 9%. Differences in age, sex, patient-weight or weight put through the foot were not significantly associated with the extent of joint widening.

A Rare Case of a Lisfranc Ligament Transection

Ligamentous Lisfranc injuries, which mimic a surgical transection are rare. Left untreated or missed, these injuries may result in severe complications including long-term disability. The present case describes a unique mechanism of injury via a sharp object puncture through the plantar surface of the midfoot. It highlights the utility of planning staged procedures to remove a large foreign body object, reports notable intraoperative techniques, and provides a decision management guide for treating this type of injury. Extensive surgical planning may be required when encountering similar cases and knowledge of this may be useful to providers.

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.

Surgical controversies and current concepts in Lisfranc injuries

INTRODUCTION

Lisfranc injuries, not as rare as previously reported, range from ligamentous to complex fracture-dislocations. Anatomical studies have identified a complex of discrete structures, and defined the anatomical characteristics of the Lisfranc joint.

SOURCES OF DATA

A narrative evidence-based review encompassed and analyzed published systematic reviews. Outcomes included clinical and surgical decision-making, including clinical-presentation, diagnosis, pathological-assessment, surgical-management techniques and indications, post-surgical care and comparative outcomes.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

Better understanding of the Lisfranc complex anatomy aids surgical treatment and tactics. Prognosis is related to injury severity, estimated by the number of foot columns affected. Surgical outcome is determined by anatomical reduction for most fixation and fusion techniques. Appropriate treatment allows return to sport, improving outcome scores.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY

Identification of Lisfranc injuries may be improved by imaging modalities such as weight-bearing computer tomography. Recent evidence supports dorsal plate fixation as a result of better quality of reduction. In complex injuries, the use of combined techniques such as trans-articular screw and plate fixation has been associated with poorer outcomes, and fusion may instead offer greater benefits.

GROWING POINTS

Open reduction is mandatory if closed reduction fails, highlighting the importance of understanding surgical anatomy. If anatomical reduction is achieved, acute arthrodesis is a safe alternative to open reduction internal fixation in selected patients, as demonstrated by comparable outcomes in subgroup analysis.

AREAS FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

The current controversies in surgical treatment remain around techniques and outcomes, as randomized controlled trials are infrequent.

The incidence of musculoskeletal injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aims

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to gather epidemiological information on selected musculoskeletal injuries and to provide pooled injury-specific incidence rates.

Methods

PubMed (National Library of Medicine) and Scopus (Elsevier) databases were searched. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they reported incidence rate (or count with population at risk), contained data on adult population, and were written in English language. The number of cases and population at risk were collected, and the pooled incidence rates (per 100,000 person-years) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by using either a fixed or random effects model.

Results

The screening of titles yielded 206 articles eligible for inclusion in the study. Of these, 173 (84%) articles provided sufficient information to be included in the pooled incidence rates. Incidences of fractures were investigated in 154 studies, and the most common fractures in the whole adult population based on the pooled incidence rates were distal radius fractures (212.0, 95% CI 178.1 to 252.4 per 100,000 person-years), finger fractures (117.1, 95% CI 105.3 to 130.2 per 100,000 person-years), and hip fractures (112.9, 95% CI 82.2 to 154.9 per 100,000 person-years). The most common sprains and dislocations were ankle sprains (429.4, 95% CI 243.0 to 759.0 per 100,000 person-years) and first-time patellar dislocations (32.8, 95% CI 21.6 to 49.7 per 100,000 person-years). The most common injuries were anterior cruciate ligament (17.5, 95% CI 6.0 to 50.2 per 100,000 person-years) and Achilles (13.7, 95% CI 9.6 to 19.5 per 100,000 person-years) ruptures.

Conclusion

The presented pooled incidence estimates serve as important references in assessing the global economic and social burden of musculoskeletal injuries. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(11):814–825.

Comparison of flexible fixation and screw fixation for isolated Lisfranc ligament injuries: A protocol for a meta-analysis of comparative studies

BACKGROUND

The frequency of isolated Lisfranc ligament (ILL) injuries has been increasing recently with the increase in low-energy trauma resulting from sports injuries. For ILL injuries, the optimal method of fixation still remains controversial. The traditional fixation method is achieved by trans-articular screws, but recently, dorsal bridge plates and suture button (SB) fixation have become alternatives. Some biomechanical studies have showed that SB fixation can provide adequate strength compared to trans-articular screws. Therefore, a meta-analysis is imperative to provide evidence on whether flexible fixation is comparable to screw fixation for treatment of ILL injuries.

METHODS

We will conduct a comprehensive literature search in PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and Web of Science databases and for comparative studies. We will apply the risk-of-bias tool of the Cochrane Collaboration for Randomized Controlled Trials to assess the methodological quality. Risk-of-Bias Assessment Tool for Non-randomized Studies was used to evaluate the quality of comparative studies. Statistical analysis will be conducted using RevMan 5.4 software (Cochrane Collaboration, London, England).

RESULTS

This systematic review will evaluate the functional outcomes and radiographic results of flexible fixation for treatment of ILL injuries.

CONCLUSION

The conclusion of this study will provide evidence for judging whether flexible fixation is superior to screw fixation for treatment of ILL injuries.

Bilateral Lisfranc Injury in a Young Female: A Case Report

Lisfranc injuries are relatively rare, accounting for only 0.2% of all injuries. It is even rarer to have this injury bilaterally, and not many case reports have been published on this topic. In this report, we present a case of a bilateral Lisfranc injury in a healthy 17-year-old woman that fell from a flight of stairs landing on both feet. The diagnosis was made by weight-bearing x-rays and computed tomography. Weight-bearing x-rays showed a subtle Lisfranc injury in the right foot with widening between the first and second rays and a disruption involving the overlapping bases of the lesser metatarsals as well as a left comminuted fracture of the proximal third and fourth metatarsals (MT) with intra-articular extension at the proximal fourth MT. CT scan of the right foot showed a fracture of the lateral margin of the medial cuneiform with a displaced bony fragment as well as a comminuted fracture of the third and fourth metatarsals with intra-articular extension and no dislocation. Surgical management, in the form of open reduction and internal fixation, was undertaken for both feet in the same setting. She had an expected course postoperatively and has been doing well, with no pain nor limitation in her activity at her six-month postoperative visit. Moreover, we present a brief review of similar published cases and an overview of Lisfranc injuries.

Lisfranc Sprain with Second Metatarsal Base Adaptive Stress Response in High-Level Athletes: Case Series and Novel Perspective on a Distinct Entity of Chronic Low-Energy Lisfranc Injury

Lisfranc injury is increasingly being recognised in the high-performance athletic cohort, particularly in contact sports. In this cohort, there is a pattern of low-energy Lisfranc injury which combines magnetic resonance findings of both ligamentous sprain and adaptive bone stress response that infers a longer timeframe of stress than the duration of symptoms would suggest. This has not been previously described, and the authors believe that this is an unrecognized subset of midfoot sprain in the context of sustained stress to the midfoot. This retrospective case report describes MRI findings of three index cases of this entity in professional athletes presenting with acute foot pain. Two responded with conservative management whilst the third ultimately required surgery. All athletes were eventually able to return to play.

Lisfranc fleck sign: characteristics and clinical outcomes following fixation using a percutaneous position Lisfranc screw

BACKGROUND

Avulsion of the Lisfranc ligament, fleck sign, results in unstable Lisfranc injuries. This cross-sectional study was conducted to investigate the characteristics of Lisfranc injuries with fleck sign and the clinical and radiological outcomes following closed reduction and percutaneous screw fixation.

METHODS

All consecutive operatively managed Lisfranc injuries with fleck sign were reviewed from 2016 to 2018. The injury pattern and characteristics of Lisfranc fleck sign were reviewed based on the preoperative CT scan. Postoperative complications besides radiological and clinical outcomes were assessed using visual analog scale (VAS) pain, American orthopedic foot and ankle society (AOFAS) midfoot scale, and foot function index (FFI).

RESULTS

Thirty patients (20 males; mean age, 36.9 ± 17.0; range, 12-69 years) with mean follow-up 16.9 ± 7.4 (range, 6-31) months were enrolled. Among 12 cases with avulsed Lisfranc ligament from the second metatarsal base, only two cases had isolated second metatarsal base fracture in plantar medial part while others had concomitant avulsion fracture of plantar aspect of the adjacent third and/or fourth metatarsal base. Mean of postoperative VAS pain, AOFAS midfoot scale, and FFI were 1.03 ± 0.29, 91.43 ± 1.43, 24.43 ± 6.66, respectively. We had seven (23.3%) removal of screws, two (6.6%) broken screws, four (13.3%) pulled-out screws, and six (20%) lost reductions in the final follow-up with good clinical functions.

CONCLUSION

Closed reduction and percutaneous fixation of the Lisfranc injuries with fleck sign by a single position screw could be a good surgical option with reliable and predictable outcomes without needing to remove the hardware, routinely.

Outcome after nonoperative treatment of stable Lisfranc injuries. A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome after nondisplaced and stable Lisfranc injuries.

METHODS

26 patients with injuries to the Lisfranc joint complex detected on CT scans, but without displacement were tested to be stable using a fluoroscopic stress test. The patients were immobilized in a non-weightbearing short leg cast for 6 weeks. The final follow-up was 55 (IQR 53-60) months after injury.

RESULTS

All the Lisfranc injuries were confirmed to be stable on follow-up weightbearing radiographs at a minimum of 3 months after injury. Median American Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot score at 1-year follow-up was 89 (IQR 84-97) and at final follow-up 100 (IQR 90-100); The AOFAS score continued to improve after 1-year (P=.005). The median visual analog scale (VAS) for pain was 0 (IQR 0-0) at the final follow-up. One patient had radiological signs of osteoarthritis at 1-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Stable Lisfranc injuries treated nonoperatively had an excellent outcome in this study with a median follow-up of 55 months. The AOFAS score continued to improve after 1 year.

Clinical Study on Different Methods of Internal Fixation for Treatment of Lisfranc Joint Injury

The Lisfranc joints are mainly used to connect the forefoot and midfoot and maintain the stability of the arch of the foot. It is an important part of the arch of the foot. If the Lisfranc joints injury is not treated in time, it will cause poor walking, pain in the back of the foot, and even deformity or disability of the forefoot. The common treatment method is to select the Kirschner wires, screws, or steel plates for incisional repositioning internal fixation surgery. In our study, we used different materials to perform fixation surgery on Lisfranc joint injury patients. We measured the joint recovery, pain condition, complications, and biomechanical indexes of different groups of patients after the operation. The results of the study showed that compared with Kirschner wire and screw internal fixation, the use of shaped arch bridge-type microsteel plate internal fixation for the treatment of metatarsotarsal joint injury patients has better foot function recovery, fewer complications, and more reliable biomechanical strength.

Retrospective analysis of treatment decisions and clinical outcome of Lisfranc injuries: operative vs. conservative treatment

Purpose

Lisfranc injuries are rare and often pose a challenge for surgeons, particularly in initially missed or neglected cases. The evidence on which subtypes of Lisfranc injuries are suitable for conservative treatment or should undergo surgery is low. The aim of this study was to retrospectively analyze treatment decisions of Lisfranc injuries and the clinical outcome of these patients within the last ten years.

Methods

All patients treated due to a Lisfranc injury in a German level I trauma centre from January 2011 until December 2020 were included in this study. Radiologic images and medical data from the patient files were analyzed concerning the classification of injury, specific radiologic variables, such as the Buehren criteria, patient baseline characteristics, and patient outcome reported with the Foot Function Index (FFI).

Results

Ninety-nine patients were included in this study (conservative = 20, operative = 79). The overall clinical outcome assessed by the FFI was good (FFI sum 23.93, SD 24.93); patients that were identified as suitable for conservative treatment did not show inferior functional results. Qualitative radiological factors like the grade of displacement and the trauma mechanism were more strongly associated with the decision for surgical treatment than quantitative radiologic factors such as the distance from the first to the second metatarsal bone.

Conclusion

If the indication for conservative or operative treatment of Lisfranc injuries is determined correctly, the clinical outcome can be comparable. These decisions should be based on several factors including quantitative and qualitative radiologic criteria, as well as the trauma mechanism.

Rotational Ankle Fracture Dislocation With Associated Lisfranc Fracture

While ankle fractures most often result from a rotational injury, Lisfranc injuries are more commonly associated with an axial load on a plantarflexed foot. Due to differing mechanisms of injury, rotational ankle fractures with Lisfranc injuries are uncommon and rarely discussed in the literature. Here we present a case of a rotational ankle fracture-dislocation with a concomitant Lisfranc injury. The Lisfranc injury, which was ultimately treated nonoperatively, was discovered seven weeks after operative fixation of the ankle fracture. At the last follow-up nine months after the initial injury, the patient had mild midfoot soreness with activity but no evidence of deformity or arch collapse. Although no deformity was observed in our patient, missed Lisfranc injuries may result in significant functional deficits indicating the importance of recognizing the possibility of a dual injury.

Sports-Related Lisfranc Injuries and Recognition of Lisfranc Variants: Surgical Strategies for Stabilization

Much has changed since Lisfranc described lesions at the tarsometatarsal (TMT) joint in 1815. What was considered an osseous high-energy condition nowadays is understood as myriad possible presentations, occurring in minor and inconspicuous traumas. Advancements in diagnostics of Lisfranc injury allow recognizing many variants of this trauma presentation, most of them with a focus on ligaments. This perception shifted trends in surgical planning, especially for implants and fixation techniques. These revolutions established a new and evolving universe around TMT lesions, different from what was known only a few years ago and still not enough to completely settle the disease scenario.

Imaging Techniques for Assessment of Dynamically Unstable Sports Related Foot and Ankle Injuries

Foot and ankle instability can be seen both in acute and chronic settings, and isolating the diagnosis can be difficult. Imaging can contribute to the clinical presentation not only by identifying abnormal morphology of various supporting soft tissue structures but also by providing referring clinicians with a sense of how functionally incompetent those structures are by utilizing weight-bearing images and with comparison to the contralateral side. Loading the affected joint and visualizing changes in alignment provide clinicians with information regarding the severity of the abnormality and, therefore, how it should be managed.

Clinical study on the surgical treatment of atypical Lisfranc joint complex injury

BACKGROUND

Lisfranc injuries have not received much attention by orthopedic doctors in the past, and there is little related research on the diagnosis and treatment of these injuries. In recent years with the rise in foot and ankle surgery, doctors are now paying more attention to this type of injury. However, there is still a high rate of missed diagnosis due to insufficient attention causing treatment delays or inadequate treatments, which eventually result in greater sequelae; including long-term pain, arthritis, foot deformity etc. In particular, for cases with a mild Lisfranc joint complex injury, the incidence of sequelae is higher.

AIM

To select an active surgical treatment for an atypical Lisfranc joint complex injury and to evaluate the clinical efficacy of the surgical treatment.

METHODS

The clinical data of 18 patients, including 10 males and 8 females aged 20-64 years with Lisfranc injuries treated in our department from January 2017 to September 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. All patients were treated with an open reduction and internal fixation method using locking titanium mini-plates and hollow screws or Kirschner wires. X-ray images were taken and follow-up was performed monthly after the operation; the internal fixation was then removed 4-5 mo after the operation; and the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score was used for evaluation on the last follow-up.

RESULTS

All patients were followed up for 6-12 mo. A good/excellent AOFAS score was observed in 88.9% of patients.

CONCLUSION

For atypical Lisfranc joint complex injuries, active open reduction and internal fixation can be performed to enable patients to obtain a good prognosis and satisfactory functional recovery.

Low-Energy Lisfranc Injuries: When to Fix and When to Fuse

Lisfranc injuries can be devastating to the athlete and nonathlete. In the athletic population, minor loss of midfoot stability compromises the high level of function demanded of the lower extremity. The most critical aspect of treatment is identifying the injury and severity of the ligamentous/articular damage. Not all athletes are able to return to their previous level of function. With appropriate treatment, a Lisfranc injury does not mandate the cessation of an athletic career. We focus on the diagnosis and an algorithmic approach to treatment in the athlete discussion the controversy of open reduction and internal fixation versus arthrodesis.