Hindfoot Endoscopy for the Treatment of Posterior Ankle Impingement Syndrome: A Comparison of Two Methods (a Standard Method versus a Method Using a Protection Cannula)
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical results between two different methods of hindfoot endoscopy to treat pos- terior ankle impingement syndrome. Materials and Methods: Between January 2008 and January 2014, 52 patients who underwent hindfoot endoscopy were retrospectively reviewed. Two methods of hindfoot endoscopy were used; Group A was treated according to van Dijk and colleagues’ standard two- portal method, and group B was treated via the modified version of the above, using a protection cannula. For clinical comparison, the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) hindfoot score, time required to return to activity, and the presence of compli- cations were used. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the AOFAS scores at the final follow-up, and there was also no statistically significant difference in the times for the scores to return to the preoperative level. There were no permanent neurovascular injuries and wound problems in either group. Conclusion: Use of protection cannula may provide additional safety during hindfoot endoscopy. We could not prove whether protec- tion cannula can provide superior safety for possible neurovascular injury. Considering the possible safety and risk of using additional instrument, the use of this method may be optional.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical results between two different methods of hindfoot endoscopy to treat pos- terior ankle impingement syndrome. Materials and Methods: Between January 2008 and January 2014, 52 patients who underwent hindfoot endoscopy were retrospectively reviewed. Two methods of hindfoot endoscopy were used; Group A was treated according to van Dijk and colleagues’ standard two- portal method, and group B was treated via the modified version of the above, using a protection cannula. For clinical comparison, the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) hindfoot score, time required to return to activity, and the presence of compli- cations were used. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the AOFAS scores at the final follow-up, and there was also no statistically significant difference in the times for the scores to return to the preoperative level. There were no permanent neurovascular injuries and wound problems in either group. Conclusion: Use of protection cannula may provide additional safety during hindfoot endoscopy. We could not prove whether protec- tion cannula can provide superior safety for possible neurovascular injury. Considering the possible safety and risk of using additional instrument, the use of this method may be optional.
참고문헌 (11)
- Stone JW, "Diagnostic arthroscopy of the ankle;Diagnostic and operative arthroscopy", pp.423~430 (1997), WB Saunders
- Jerosch J, "Endoscopic resection of a symptomatic os trigonum", Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 14, pp.1188~1193 (2006)[DOI]
- Golano P, "Ankle anatomy for the arthroscopist. Part I: the portals", Foot Ankle Clin, 11, pp.253~273 (2006)[DOI]
- Ferkel RD, "Arthroscopy of the ankle and foot", J Bone Joint Surg Am, 75, pp.1233~1242 (1993)[DOI]
- Ferkel RD, "Neurological complications of ankle arthroscopy", Arthroscopy, 12, pp.200~208 (1996)[DOI]
- van Dijk CN, "A 2-portal endoscopic approach for diagnosis and treatment of posterior ankle pathology", Arthroscopy, 16, pp.871~876 (2000)[DOI]
- Abramowitz Y, "Outcome of resection of a symptomatic os trigonum", J Bone Joint Surg Am, 85, pp.1051~1057 (2003)[DOI]
- Guo QW, "Open versus endoscopic excision of a symptomatic os trigonum: a comparative study of 41 cases", Arthroscopy, 26, pp.384~390 (2010)[DOI]
- van Dijk CN, "Hindfoot endoscopy", Foot Ankle Clin, 11, pp.391~414 (2006)[DOI]
- van Dijk CN, "Hindfoot endoscopy for posterior ankle pain", Instr Course Lect, 55, pp.545~554 (2006)
- Acevedo JI, "Coaxial portals for posterior ankle arthroscopy: an anatomic study with clinical correlation on 29 patients", Arthroscopy, 16, pp.836~842 (2000)[DOI]