-
Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech · Jan 2012
[Epidemiological, morphological and clinical aspects of ankle fractures].
- J Marvan, H Bělehrádková, V Džupa, V Báča, and M Krbec.
- Ortopedicko-traumatologická klinika FNKV a 3. LF UK Praha.
- Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2012 Jan 1;79(3):269-74.
Purpose Of The StudyThe study presents the evaluation and comparison of two groups of patients surgically treated for ankle fractures at our department in 2007 and in 2010, respectively. Our analysis included patients' age, the mechanism of injury, fracture morphology and the method of osteosynthesis. The aim of the comparison was to ascertain recent trends in the development of the selected characteristics.Material And MethodsThe 2007 group comprised 62 patients, 31 men and 32 women, the 2010 group had 123 patients, 55 men and 68 women. The ankle fractures were classified according to the Weber and Lauge-Hansen systems. The selected characteristics were analysed in each group and the results were compared to obtain information on changes during the interval of 4 years. The data were evaluated using the methods of descriptive statistics; categorical data were analysed by the chi-square test with the level of significance set at 5%.ResultsThe average age was 44 years in men and 59 in women in the 2007 group and 40 years in men and 56 in women in the 2010 group; in the whole patient group, the average age decreased from 52 years in 2007 to 47 years in 2010. Based on the Weber classification, the incidence of fractures in 2007 and 2010 was as follows; type A, 5% in both years; type B, 68% and 72%; type C, 27% and 23%. There was no significant difference between the groups in the incidence of either type B or type C fractures (p = 0.823 and p = 0.659, respectively). The majority of fractures were caused by low-energy mechanisms. High-energy injuries due to falls from a height or traffic accidents did not exceed 6 %. In men, who sustained sports-related injury more often, fractures were found in 23% and 16% in 2007 and 2010, respectively; this difference approached statistical significance (p = 0.050). Most of the fibular fractures were managed by plate osteosynthesis, often in combination with lag screws. Medial malleolar fractures were usually fixed with two cancellous screws, or with a screw and a K-wire. The number of surgical inspections of the medial structures of an injured ankle with no medial malleolar fracture decreased from 68% in 2007 to 37% in 2010. Osteosynthesis of a fractured posterior margin of the distal tibia was carried out in 7% of the patients in 2007 and in 23% in 2010.DiscussionThe morphological and epidemiological characteristics described were selected to obtain a comprehensive notion of the patients studied. Only the patients who had surgery were included. An increase in the number of ankle fractures managed surgically during a four-year period of our study was due to a growing number of patients and the fact that surgery was indicated more frequently because stricter criteria for assessment of post-reduction findings or secondary displacement were adopted. In surgical treatment, the recent trend preferring primary osteosynthesis to transfixation or external fixation has been evident because it allows for early rehabilitation and return to normal activities.ConclusionsThe number of ankle fractures treated by primary osteosynthesis grew between 2007 and 2010. There was also an increase in the number of fractured posterior margins of the distal tibia managed by osteosynthesis. The results of the Weber and Lauge-Hansen classifications were in agreement with the relevant literature data. In the majority of cases the ankle fracture occurred as a single trauma.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.