Posterior Translation of the Fibula is a Critical Factor in the Stability of the Syndesmosis After Injury and Repair
Authors: Patel Neel , Pfeiffer Thomas Rudolf , Naendrup Jan-Hendrik , Murphy Conor , Zlotnicki Jason , Debski Richard , Hogan MaCalus Vinson , Musahl Volker 
Published: July 2018

Objectives:

Anterior inferior tibiofibular ligament (AITFL), posterior inferior tibiofibular ligament (PITFL), and interosseous membrane (IOM) disruption is a predictive measure of residual symptoms after an ankle injury. Unstable syndesmotic injuries are typically treated surgically with cortical screw or suture button fixation. Previous studies have shown contradicting findings regarding the effects of partial syndesmotic injuries and different surgical fixation methods on tibiofibular kinematics. Thus, the objective of this study was to quantify tibiofibular joint motion with sequential disruption of the syndesmosis and with syndesmotic screw and suture button fixation compared to the intact ankle.

Methods:

Nine fresh-frozen human cadaveric specimens (mean age 60 yrs.; range 38-73 yrs.) were tested using a six degree-of-freedom robotic testing system. The subtalar joint was fused and the tibia and calcaneus were rigidly fixed to a robotic manipulator, while complete fibular length was maintained and fibular motion was unconstrained. A 5 Nm external rotation moment and 5 Nm inversion moment were independently applied to the ankle at 0°, 15°, and 30° plantarflexion and 10° dorsiflexion. Fibular motion with respect to the tibia was tracked by a 3D optical tracking system. Outcome variables included fibular medial-lateral (ML) translation, anterior-posterior (AP) translation, and external rotation (ER) in the following states: 1) intact ankle, 2) AITFL transected, 3) AITFL, PITFL, and IOM transected (complete injury), 4) 3.5 mm cannulated tricortical screw fixation, 5) suture button fixation. An ANOVA with a post-hoc Tukey analysis was performed for statistical analysis (*p < 0.05).

Results:

All significant differences in fibular motion between ankle states occurred during the inversion moment. An isolated AITFL injury caused significant increases in fibular posterior translation at 15° and 30° plantarflexion compared to the intact ankle. A complete syndesmotic injury caused significant increases in fibular posterior translation in all 4 ankle positions and in fibular ER at 0° flexion and 15° plantarflexion compared to the intact ankle. No significant differences were detected in fibular motion between an isolated AITFL injury and complete injury at any ankle positions. No significant differences existed between the tricortical screw fixation and the intact ankle. Significantly higher fibular posterior translation was observed with the suture button compared to the intact ankle at 0° flexion, 30° and 15° plantarflexion. (Figure 1)

Conclusion:

An isolated AITFL injury resulted in a significant increase in fibular posterior translation relative to the tibia, comparable to that a complete injury, especially in positions of plantarflexion. Current diagnostic protocols after injury focus on the evaluation of fibular ML translation. However, these findings show that it is important to also evaluate syndesmotic stability in the sagittal plane and at different ankle positions. Restoration of native tibiofibular kinematics is essential to prevent post-traumatic arthritis. Tricortical screw fixation was able to restore tibiofibular kinematics in all planes. However, suture button fixation was not able to restore tibiofibular AP translation, which suggests that physicians should critically evaluate fibular AP translation and individualize treatment of unstable ankle injuries when reconstructing the syndesmosis with suture button fixation. [Figure: see text]