Search

Lisfranc injuries are rare but significant foot injuries, as they often result from polytrauma patients, and are often misdiagnosed, which further complicate their evaluation and contribute to their propensity towards disability. It is recommended that, on diagnosis, Lisfranc injuries be treated as soon as possible to decrease the risk of future chronic pain, disability, or osteoarthritis. Our study evaluated patients who completed the patient reported outcome measurement information systems (PROMIS) along with the foot function index (FFI) following operative fixation for Lisfranc injury. Fifty-one patients between 2010 and 2020 met inclusion criteria and were selected for this study, with completion. Utilizing the electronic medical record (EMR), patient charts were reviewed to obtain basic patient demographic information and comorbidities. Operative reports were reviewed to determine which procedure was performed for definitive fixation. Primary arthrodesis was associated with a significant decrease in complication rates (p =.025) when compared to ORIF. Females, arthrodesis, and procedures using a home run (HR) screw were independent risk factors for significantly higher reports of PROMIS pain interference. Arthrodesis also was associated with lower PROMIS pain interference scores. Arthrodesis and males exhibited higher scores in all FFI categories. Our results provide evidence that patient reported outcomes following Lisfranc surgery reported via PROMIS, FFI and VAS scores are independently influenced by patient demographics, comorbidities, and surgical variables. Analysis of potential associations between these patient characteristics and PROMIS and FFI scores provides evidence for physicians to manage patient expectations prior to operative treatment of a nonpolytraumatic Lisfranc injury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The modified Lapidus arthrodesis is a standard procedure to correct middle to severe hallux valgus (HV) deformities. Recently, minimally invasive techniques of first metatarsocuneiform joint (MCJ) resection using a Shannon burr were described. The primary goal of this study is to compare the anatomical efficacy and safety of first MCJ resection using a straight 2 × 13-mm Shannon burr and minimally invasive technique (MIS) vs an open technique using an oscillating saw. Methods: Ten pairs of fresh frozen cadaveric feet were randomly assigned to open or MIS first MCJ resection with subsequent systematic dissection. For the MIS procedure, a dorsomedial approach was used and for the open procedure a medioplantar approach was used. Cartilage removal was investigated by analyzing standardized scaled photographs of the resected articular surfaces with ImageJ software. Nearby structures at risk were analyzed for iatrogenic violation: tibialis anterior (TA), extensor hallucis longus (EHL) and peroneus longus (PL) tendons, and the Lisfranc ligament complex (LLC). Results: In the MIS group, the median cartilage resection was 85.9% at the cuneiform and 85.6% at the metatarsal bone compared to 100% cartilage resection in open technique (P <.01). Iatrogenic damage of the LLC, EHL, and TA tendons was not found in any group. The PL tendon was thinned out (<25% of tendon thickness) in 4 cases (40%) in the open group and in 1 case (10%) in the MIS group. A safe zone of 3.0 mm between the articular surface of the cuneiform bone and the LLC was identified, which can be resected without putting the LLC at risk when performing lateral-based wedge resections. Conclusion: In this cadaver study with the procedures performed by an experienced foot and ankle surgeon, and using 2 different surgical approaches, we found general parity between the Shannon burr MIS technique vs oscillating saw open technique techniques with more risk to the PL with our open technique and approximately 15% less cartilage resection with our MIS technique. Level of Evidence: Level V, cadaver study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Category: Trauma; Midfoot/Forefoot Introduction/Purpose: Lisfranc injuries are often treated with open reduction and internal fixation using rigid fixation techniques. The use of flexible fixation to stabilize the Lisfranc joint is a newer technique. The purpose of this cadaveric study is to compare the amount of diastasis at the Lisfranc interval under physiologic loads when treated with a knotless fiber tape construct and a solid screw. Methods: Ten cadavers (20 feet) had native motion at the intact Lisfranc interval assessed at multiple physiologic loads representing guarded walking (69N), walking (138N), and running (207N). The Lisfranc ligamentous complex was then disrupted, and testing repeated to evaluate the amount of diastasis. Randomization was performed to determine type of fixation for each cadaver: a solid screw or knotless fiber tape construct. Once fixation was completed, specimens were cyclically loaded for 10,000 cycles at physiologic loads and diastasis was quantified after each load cycle to compare the interventions. Diastasis was measured using motion tracking cameras and retroreflective marker sets. A non-inferiority statistical analysis was performed. Results: Diastasis mean values were confirmed to be >2mm for all load bearing conditions in the injury model. Post-treatment, diastasis was significantly reduced when compared to the sectioned conditions (p=0.00) for both treatment options. Non-inferiority analyses showed that the knotless fiber tape construct did not perform inferior to screw fixation for diastasis at the Lisfranc interval at any of the compared load states. Conclusion: Under physiologic loads, there is no significant difference in diastasis at the Lisfranc interval when treating ligamentous Lisfranc injuries with a knotless fiber tape construct or solid screws. Both reduced diastasis from the injured state and were not different from the intact state. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Category: Midfoot/Forefoot; Trauma Introduction/Purpose: Lisfranc fracture-dislocation is an uncommon but serious injury that currently lacks universal consensus on optimal operative treatment. Two common fixation methods are open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and primary arthrodesis (PA). The objective of this study is to analyze the cost difference between ORIF and PA of Lisfranc injuries, along with the contribution of medical services to overall costs. Methods: This was a retrospective cost analysis of the MarketScan database from 2010-2020. Patients undergoing primary ORIF (CPT code 28615) versus PA (28730 and 28740) for Lisfranc fracture-dislocation were identified. The primary independent variable was ORIF versus PA of Lisfranc injury. Costs accrued due to operative management was the primary objective, and was analyzed according to net payment, total payment, coinsurance, copayment, deductible, and coordination of benefits per savings (COB/savings) amounts. Outpatient surgery setting (hospital versus ambulatory surgical center (ASC)) and requirement for secondary arthrodesis within the primary ORIF group were secondary independent variables. The utilization of and costs contributed by medical services were secondary outcomes. These included outpatient clinic visits, foot radiographs, lower extremity magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), lower extremity computed tomography (CT), physical therapy (PT), and opioid prescriptions. Student's t-test, chi-squared test, and Poisson multivariable regression were used for statistical analysis, with significance set as P < 0.05. Results: From 2010 to 2020, 7,268 patients underwent operative management of Lisfranc injuries, with 5,689 (78.3%) ORIF and 1,579 (21.7%) PA. Of those undergoing initial ORIF, 22 (0.39%) were converted to secondary arthrodesis at a mean ± standard deviation of 10.2 ± 12.1 months after the index surgery. PA was independently associated with increased net payment, total payment, and coinsurance. When compared to primary ORIF, patients undergoing PA utilized more clinic and PT visits and imaging sessions. However, primary ORIF with secondary arthrodesis was associated with more clinic visits, imaging, and generated higher costs from these medical services compared to PA alone. Within hospital and ASCs, PA was associated with increased net and total payments. However, out-of-pocket (OOP) costs were found to be higher in ASCs. Conclusion: Treatment of Lisfranc fracture-dislocation with PA is associated with higher initial costs compared to ORIF with subsequent secondary arthrodesis. Conversely, secondary arthrodesis demonstrated significantly higher costs and resource utilization compared to primary procedures. Specific cost drivers for PA and secondary arthrodesis were clinic visits and perioperative imaging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background Purely ligamentous Lisfranc injuries are mainly caused by low energy damage and often require surgical treatment. There are several operative techniques for rigid fixation to solve this problem clinically. This study evaluated the effect of using the Tightrope system to reconstruct the Lisfranc ligament for elastic fixation. Methods We retrospectively analyzed 11 cases with purely ligamentous Lisfranc injuries treated with the Tightrope system from 2016 to 2019, including 8 male and 3 female. X-ray was performed regularly after operation to measure the distance between the first and second metatarsal joint and the visual analogue scale (VAS) score was used to evaluate pain relief. American orthopedic foot & ankle society (AOFAS) and Maryland foot score were recorded at the last follow-up. Results The average follow-up time was 20.5 months (range, 17–24). There was statistically significant difference in the distance between the first and second metatarsal joint and VAS score at 3 months, 6 months, and the last follow-up when compared with preoperative values (P

Abstract Background This study aimed to clarify the morphological characteristics of the Lisfranc ligament and the cuneiform 1-metatarsal 2&3 plantar ligament (CMPL). Methods Forty legs from 20 cadavers were examined. Classification proceeded according to the number of fiber bundles in the Lisfranc ligament and the CMPL. Morphological features measured were fiber bundle length, width, thickness, and angle. Results In Type I-a, the Lisfranc ligament and the CMPL were a single fiber bundle; in Type I-b, the Lisfranc ligament was a single fiber bundle, and the CMPL was two fiber bundles; in Type II-a, the Lisfranc ligament was a two fiber bundle, and the CMPL was a single fiber bundle; in Type II-b, the Lisfranc ligament and the CMPL were two fiber bundles; in Type III-a, the Lisfranc ligament was three fiber bundles, and the CMPL was a single fiber bundle; in Type III-b, the Lisfranc ligament was three fiber bundles, and the CMPL was two fiber bundles; in Type IV, the Lisfranc ligament and the CMPL could not be separated. Type I-a was seen in 37.5%, Type I-b in 10%, Type II-a in 30%, Type II-b in 7.5%, Type III-a in 7.5%, Type III-b in 2.5%, and Type IV in 5%. The Lisfranc ligament was significantly larger than the CMPL in total fiber bundle width, total fiber bundle thickness, and total fiber bundle angle. Conclusion The Lisfranc ligament had up to 3 fiber bundles and the CMPL had one or two fiber bundles; classifications were four types and two subgroups.

Background: Early diagnosis is important in patients with Lisfranc joint injury to avoid subsequent complications. As the ligaments in the Lisfranc joint are relatively small and course obliquely, isotropic 3-dimensional (3D) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be beneficial to evaluate ligament injury. The purpose of this study was to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of MRI, including isotropic 3D MRI for acute injury of the Lisfranc joint, especially of the interosseous C1-M2 ligament (Lisfranc ligament), the dorsal C1-M2 ligament (dorsal ligament), and the interosseous C1-C2 ligament, compared with direct operative observations. Methods: This retrospective review identified 27 patients who had undergone MR examination for acute Lisfranc joint injury followed by surgery. We reviewed the operative reports that described the Lisfranc, dorsal, and interosseous C1-C2 ligaments. All patients underwent an MRI, including a 2D oblique plane image parallel to the Lisfranc ligament and an isotropic 3D MRI. An image analysis of the integrity of the 3 ligaments and other associated injuries was performed. The diagnostic accuracy of MRI was analyzed using operative findings as a reference standard. Results: Lisfranc and dorsal ligament injuries were identified on MRI in all patients. MRI depicted disruption of the interosseous C1-C2 ligament in 12 patients. MRI diagnostic accuracy for detection of Lisfranc, dorsal, and interosseous C1-C2 ligaments was 100% (95% CI 0.82-1.0), 74% (95% CI 0.54-0.89), and 70% (95% CI 0.50-0.86), respectively. Conclusion: MRI with oblique planes parallel to the Lisfranc ligament and isotropic 3D MRI was reliable for detecting Lisfranc ligament injury, whereas MRI findings of the dorsal and interosseous C1-C2 ligaments were less consistent with operative observations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Purely ligamentous Lisfranc injuries are mainly caused by low energy damage and often require surgical treatment. There are several operative techniques for rigid fixation to solve this problem clinically. This study evaluated the effect of using the Tightrope system to reconstruct the Lisfranc ligament for elastic fixation.Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 11 cases with purely ligamentous Lisfranc injuries treated with the Tightrope system from 2016 to 2019, including 8 male and 3 female. X-ray was performed regularly after operation to measure the distance between the first and second metatarsal joint and the visual analogue scale (VAS) score was used to evaluate pain relief. American orthopedic foot & ankle society (AOFAS) and Maryland foot score were recorded at the last follow-up.Results: The average follow-up time was 20.5 months (range, 17-24). There was statistically significant difference in the distance between the first and second metatarsal joint and VAS score at 3 months, 6 months, and the last follow-up when compared with preoperative values (P < 0.05).Mean of postoperative AOFAS mid-foot scale and Maryland foot score were 92.4 ± 4.3, 94.1 ± 3.5, respectively. The Tightrope system was not removed and the foot obtained better biomechanical stability. No complications occurred during the operation.Conclusion: Tightrope system in the treatment of purely ligamentous Lisfranc injuries can stabilize the tarsometatarsal joint and achieve satisfactory effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Injury to the Lisfranc interosseous ligament is currently managed with a screw. However, this can potentially further disrupt the ligament. The objective of this study was to observe the proximity of the screw or disruption it can cause at the ligament attachment sites. Methods. Twenty-three feet were studied. A 40-mm, 4.0, partially threaded, cannulated screw was inserted from the base of the second metatarsal into the medial cuneiform. The relationship of the ligament attachment sites to the screw hole were measured. Results. The screw hole contacted at least 1 of the ligament attachment sites in 20 of the 23 feet. The screw hole fully penetrated it in 7 feet, partially disrupted it in 4 feet, and had less than or equal to 1 mm of contact in 9 feet. There was no contact with either of the attachment sites in 3 feet, with an average distance of 1.5 mm separating them. Conclusion. Our results show the proximity of the ligament to the screw and the disruption that can result from its insertion. This is clinically relevant as some amount ligamentous disruption is likely to occur with insertion of the "Lisfranc screw," which may interfere with its healing process. Levels of Evidence: Level V: Expert opinion includes case reports and technique tips [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of different ligamentous Lisfranc injuries on computed tomography (CT) findings under weight-bearing and to emphasize the indications for surgical treatment of their various types. Methods: Sixteen human cadaveric lower limbs were placed in weight-bearing radiolucent frame for CT scanning. All intact specimens were initially scanned, and then, dorsal approach was used for sequential ligaments cutting of: (1) the dorsal and the interosseous (Lisfranc) ligaments between medical cuneiform (MC) and metatarsal 2 (MT2); (2) the plantar ligament between the MC and MT3; (3) the plantar ligament between MC and MT2. Based on sequential CT scans, the distances MT1–MT2, MC–T2, as well as the alignment and dorsal displacement of MT2 were measured. Results: Slight increase in the distances MT1–MT2 and MC–MT2 was observed after the disruption of the dorsal and the interosseous ligaments. Further increase in MT1–MT2 and MC–MT2 distances was registered after the disruption of the ligament between MC and MT3. The largest distances MT1–MT2 and MC–MT2 were measured after the final plantar ligament cut between MC and MT2. Conclusions: Unequivocal instability is observed with simultaneous transection of the Lisfranc ligament with both plantar ligaments. On CT used as diagnostic tool, plantar injuries at the basis of the second and the third metatarsal are indirect signs of violation of the ligaments and represent an indication for surgical treatment. When using magnetic resonance imaging as diagnostic tool, a ruptured Lisfranc ligament alone without dislocation does not necessarily need surgical intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Suture buttons have been used for isolated Lisfranc ligament (ILL) fixation. However, no study has reported on its clinical and radiologic outcomes. Methods: In this retrospective comparative study, patients with ILL injuries were divided into 2 groups according to the treatment method: 32 conventional screw group and 31 suture button group. The clinical and radiologic outcomes at preoperation, 6 months and 1 year postoperation, and last follow-up period were measured. Plantar foot pressure was measured at postoperative month 6 months. Postoperative complications at the last follow-up were evaluated. Results: The suture button group showed better American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society midfoot scale (P <.001) and visual analog scale (P <.001) scores compared with the conventional screw fixation group at the postoperative month 6 period before screw removal. However, no significant difference in clinical outcome between the 2 groups was found at postoperative year 1 or last follow-up. No differences in radiologic outcomes were found between the 2 groups. Plantar foot pressure was significantly elevated in the conventional screw group at the great toe and first metatarsal head area compared with the contralateral foot just before screw removal. Recurrent Lisfranc joint diastasis was found in a single case in the conventional screw group and 2 cases in the suture button group. Conclusion: Suture button fixation in the treatment of ILL injuries may provide comparable fixation stability and clinical outcome with conventional screw fixation in the early postoperative period. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective case-control study, therapeutic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lisfranc injuries are a disruption of one or more of the tarsometatarsal joints and have an estimated incidence of 1/55 000 people. However, the total number of Lisfranc injuries could be underreported, because almost 20% of these injuries are initially missed. Because of the relative infrequency of these injuries, the current literature is inconsistent in regard to proper treatment. This article provides a review of Lisfranc complex injuries including relevant anatomy, diagnosis, treatment, classifications, operative approaches, and outcomes and complications. Based on existing evidence, it also proposes an algorithm the authors prefer for the evaluation and treatment of Lisfranc complex injuries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This study aimed to clarify the morphological characteristics of the Lisfranc ligament and the cuneiform 1-metatarsal 2&3 plantar ligament (CMPL). Methods: Forty legs from 20 cadavers were examined. Classification proceeded according to the number of fiber bundles in the Lisfranc ligament and the CMPL. Morphological features measured were fiber bundle length, width, thickness, and angle. Results: In Type I-a, the Lisfranc ligament and the CMPL were a single fiber bundle; in Type I-b, the Lisfranc ligament was a single fiber bundle, and the CMPL was two fiber bundles; in Type II-a, the Lisfranc ligament was a two fiber bundle, and the CMPL was a single fiber bundle; in Type II-b, the Lisfranc ligament and the CMPL were two fiber bundles; in Type III-a, the Lisfranc ligament was three fiber bundles, and the CMPL was a single fiber bundle; in Type III-b, the Lisfranc ligament was three fiber bundles, and the CMPL was two fiber bundles; in Type IV, the Lisfranc ligament and the CMPL could not be separated. Type I-a was seen in 37.5%, Type I-b in 10%, Type II-a in 30%, Type II-b in 7.5%, Type III-a in 7.5%, Type III-b in 2.5%, and Type IV in 5%. The Lisfranc ligament was significantly larger than the CMPL in total fiber bundle width, total fiber bundle thickness, and total fiber bundle angle. Conclusion: The Lisfranc ligament had up to 3 fiber bundles and the CMPL had one or two fiber bundles; classifications were four types and two subgroups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Category: Midfoot/Forefoot; Trauma Introduction/Purpose: Untreated Lisfranc injuries can lead to chronic pain, midfoot arthritis, and functional disability 1,2,5. Approximately 20% of Lisfranc injuries are misdiagnosed or completely missed on initial evaluation, which can be attributed to a lack of parameters of what is within normal limits for subjects without injury in the Lisfranc complex3,4. The purpose of this study is to identify anatomic variations of unidimensional, bidimensional, and tridimensional (1D, 2D, 3D) measurements of the Lisfranc complex of normal individuals using weight-bearing computed tomography (WBCT) imaging. Our hypothesis is that there is some variation among individuals with a difference between right and left of the same individual of less than 10%. Methods: A total of 191 subjects with bilateral WBCT scans of the foot were collected from three tertiary medical centers from 2019-2022. Exclusion criteria included: history of Lisfranc injury, first to fourth metatarsal base fractures, Charcot arthropathy, midfoot arthritis, cuneiform fractures, and forefoot surgery proximal to the metatarsal neck region. The following Lisfranc joint measurements were collected6 bilaterally: joint volume (3D), area of the joint on a consistent axial slice (2D), and distance between the second metatarsal and medial cuneiform (1D). Foot alignment was assessed using lateral talar-first metatarsal angle (Meary's Angle). Patient demographics (age, sex, weight, height, BMI) were also collected. Descriptive statistics were calculated for quantitative variables. Percent difference was used to assess volume, area, and distance variation between sides.7 Correlation between demographic data and Lisfranc measurements was assessed using Pearson Correlation tests. A T-test was used for categorical variables. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The cohort included 61% female and 39% male with an average age of 45.2±17.3 years. The mean volume, area, and distance measurements of the Lisfranc joint for both left and right sides are shown in Figure 1. Overall, the mean percent difference between left and right sides were 11.9%, 14.9% and 13.9% for volume, area and diastasis, respectively (Figure 1). No association was found between age, BMI, or weight and the volume, area or distance measurements. A correlation (r=0.48, p= < 0.001) was found between height and left Lisfranc joint volume, but no other measurements. Significant difference between sex in volume (p < 0.001) and area (p < 0.001) measurements were found. Foot alignment did not have a correlation with a variation of the Lisfranc complex measurements. Conclusion: This study provides an objective characterizing of the anatomic variations of the Lisfranc joint amongst healthy individuals. Differences in the measurements and the large standard deviation in absolute measurements of volume, area, and distance suggests that percent difference with the contralateral side may be a better metric to use to diagnose Lisfranc instability. Our results showed that the difference between bilateral sides in a patient is less than 15% for volume, area, and diastasis. The results of this study can set the foundation for future studies to determine the cut-off value for the diagnosis of Lisfranc instability using WBCT imaging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Ligamentous Lisfranc injuries are frequently overlooked because of subtle clinical presentations and diagnostic difficulties. The dorsal Lisfranc ligament (DLL) is easily visualized with ultrasound (US), which can provide quick, cost‐effective diagnoses of disorders but is not considered standard clinical practice. This study sought to compare DLL measurement accuracy between US and cadaveric dissection. Methods: Ultrasound images of 22 embalmed cadaveric feet were obtained with an M‐Turbo US machine and a 6–13‐MHz linear array (FUJIFILM SonoSite, Inc, Bothell, WA). Images were measured in the US unit and again with ImageJ software (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD). Specimens were dissected, and DLL morphologic characteristics were recorded. Results: Twenty‐two specimens were scanned, however 4 were excluded, leaving a sample of 11 male and 7 female cadaveric specimens (mean age ± SD, 80.3 ± 14.03 years). The DLL length differences between SonoSite (8.39 ± 1.27 mm) and ImageJ (8.25 ± 1.84 mm) were not significant (P >.05). Both US DLL measurements significantly differed from the gross dissection measurement (10.8 ± 1.85 mm; P <.001). The morphologic characteristics of the DLL at dissection were consistent. Overall, 70% to 80% of the ligament length was represented by US compared to dissection. The dorsal joint space did not differ significantly between SonoSite (2.19 ± 0.49 mm) and ImageJ (2.05 ± 0.52; P >.05). Both US measurements were also significantly larger than dissection measurements (1.04 ± 0.24; P <.001). Intraclass correlation coefficients indicated good reliability for the DLL length (0.835) and moderate reliability for the dorsal joint space (0.714). Conclusions: The DLL is underrepresented but easily distinguished by US, demonstrating its utility in Lisfranc injury diagnosis. Thus, we propose a 4‐component assessment involving US, which may provide more rapid, cost‐effective diagnoses of subtle Lisfranc injuries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A cannulated screw is currently the standard fixation method to reduce and stabilize diastasis at the lisfranc joint following injury. Currently, there is no literature examining the area of the lisfranc ligament damaged by screw placement. The objective of this investigation is to define the area of the ligament damaged by fixation with a 3.5-mm cannulated screw.Materials and Methods: Twelve cadaveric feet were dissected to identify the Lisfranc ligament metatarsal insertion site and origin on the medial cuneiform. A 3.5-mm cannulated screw was then passed over the course of the ligament and removed. The Lisfranc joint was then dissected to measure the dimensions of the ligament and damage from screw passage at the origin and insertion using imaging software.Results: Mean injury area on the metatarsal was 3.49 mm2 and the area of injury for the cuneiform was 3.33 mm2. The mean percent of the area damaged was calculated to be 1.75% and 2.43% at the cuneiform and metatarsal, respectively.Conclusion: A proportionally small area of the Lisfranc ligament is disrupted following screw fixation, but the implications of this on ligament healing and outcomes remain to be elucidated.Levels Of Evidence: Level V: Cadaveric study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract The primary objective of this investigation was to determine the level of agreement and reliability of the stress examination of the Lisfranc tarsometatarsal joint complex. Secondary objectives were to determine surgeon preferences with respect to this testing and to use gaze recognition software to perform an eye-tracking assessment during the performance of the test. Twelve foot and ankle surgeons, 12 residents, and 12 students were shown 2 intraoperative fluoroscopic still images and 1 video of the stress examination of the tarsometatarsal joint complex using stress abduction of the forefoot on the rearfoot. Participants were asked to evaluate the result as being "positive" or "negative" for tarsometatarsal joint stability. The overall reliability of the interpretation of the stress examination was a kappa of 0.281 (surgeons 0.182; residents 0.423; students 0.256) indicating "fair" agreement. Survey results indicated wide variability in the perioperative preferences and protocols of surgeons dealing with the evaluation and treatment of the tarsometatarsal joint. Eye-tracking results also demonstrated variability in the anatomic structures of interest focused on during performance of this testing. The results of this investigation provide evidence of reliability well below what would be expected of a gold standard test during stress examination of the Lisfranc tarsometatarsal joint complex. These results indicate that future scientific endeavors are required to standardize the performance and interpretation of this testing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction/Purpose: The preferred method of fixation for ligamentous Lisfranc injuries is controversial, with the traditional method being transarticular screws. Unfortunately screw removal is often required leading surgeons to seek alternative fixation methods including fibertape constructs. Our lab has published biomechanical results on the safety and efficacy of a fibertape construct for the treatment of ligamentous Lisfranc injuries demonstrating biomechanical superiority with the supplementation of an intercuneiform limb. The purpose of this biomechanical study is to compare transarticular screws to a fibertape construct under loading and utilizing 3D visualization software. Methods: Three matched pairs of cadaveric specimens were dissected to allow for the placement of three screws on the dorsal aspect of the each bone involved in the Lisfranc complex. The diastasis between bones were measured at three midfoot joints in the Lisfranc articulation while each specimen was loaded to 75% of donor bodyweight. Measurements were obtained for the preinjured specimens. The MC-2MT joint was sectioned under fluoroscopic imaging and re-measured to produce at least 2 mm of gapping. Specimens were then fixed with either transarticular screws or fibertape with an intercuneiform limb and computed tomography scans were performed. Post-fixation measurements were obtained for 250 N of axial loading with subsequent 100 N increases up to 650 N. CT scans were imported as DICOM images and the three bones were segmented to analyze the gapping that occurred at the dorsal, interosseous, and plantar portions of the ligament. Results: There were no significant differences detected for the diastasis between bones in the Lisfranc complex between the fibertape and screws. After loading to 650 N, no specimens had reached a diastasis of 2 mm through coordinate digitized measurements (Figure 1A and B). At 650 N of loading the fibertape specimens displayed an average diastasis of 0.78 mm while the specimens fixed with screws also displayed an average diastasis of 0.78 mm. 3D diastasis measurements showed coordinate digitized measurements were within 0.2 mm of those measured from 3D reconstruction of CT scans. The largest diastasis occurred at the dorsal aspect of the ligament. Conclusion: The use of a fibertape device involving a supplementary intercuneiform limb appears to provide a biomechanically viable alternative to screws for ligamentous Lisfranc injuries. Diastasis was verified using 3D computer models. Future efforts involve increasing the number of specimens, applying cyclic loading, and determining the effects on each portion of the ligament for each fixation type. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction/Purpose: Lisfranc Ligamentous Complex injuries are commonly misdiagnosed due to their unreliable projection on plain films. Many studies have striven to establish baseline measurements of the frequently injured articulations. While cadaver, MRI, ultrasound, and non-weight bearing computer tomography (CT) have been utilized, weight bearing CT (WBCT) scans are a relatively new imaging modality that has not yet been utilized to establish reproducible and widely-referenced baseline anatomic positions. The hyoptheses of this study are: 1. Standing, weight bearing CT scan will allow for evaluation and measurement of the Lisfranc joint complex. 2. There will be no side to side variation or sex-based differences in the Lisfranc joint complex. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted using the electronic medical record. Inclusion criteria was applied as follows: patients who have undergone weight bearing CT of the bilateral lower extremities from 2018 to 2020. One hundred twelve foot CT scans were acquired for measurements. Measurements were collected by two independent reviewers twice in order to achieve inter- and intra-reliability. The measurements were then analyzed in order to establish a baseline for normal anatomy, compare injured to non-injured side, and observe any sex-based differences. Results: Measurements of uninjured legs were utilized to define normal parameters for Lisfranc ligamentous complex (LLC) injuries. Averages were found for measurements of base 1 to 2 MT 2.7mm (SD=0.7mm), medial cuneiform to 2nd MT [M2-C1] 3.7mm (SD=0.7mm), intercuneiform distance 1.2mm (SD=0.3mm), sagittal descent 12.2mm (SD=5.4mm). Patient's with injury to LLC had a larger base of M1-M2, distance from base of first metatarsal to base of second metatarsal (Δ=.5903, p <.0001) and M2- C1 interval (Δ=1.8008, p<0.0001). Males had significantly higher M2-C1 (p=0.0031), intercuneiform distance (p=0.0039), and sagittal descent (p=0.0008) compared to female patients. No significant differences were found with regard to left vs right side in any of the measurements. Intercuneiform distance (p=0.0039) was found to significantly decrease as age increased, while sagittal descent significantly increased with increased age (p=0.0066). Conclusion: This study is one of the first investigations aims to assist in defining baseline anatomic measurements for Lisfranc ligamentous complex parameters on WBCT. The values and comparisons obtained were able to reinforce that weight bearing CT is valuable in identifying subtle injuries to the LLC while also demonstrating that there is male-to-female and age-related differences that should be kept in mind when radiographically evaluating imaging studies of injured patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Research findings have linked dorsal Lisfranc ligament (dLL) rupture to complete Lisfranc ligament complex rupture; identifying deformation characteristics of the dorsal Lisfranc ligament alone may be helpful in diagnosing complete ligament rupture. The goal of the present study was to assess the deformation characteristics of the asymptomatic dLL using physiologically relevant stress/loads in a clinical setting and to discern normative dLL parameters. Methods Unilateral dLL measurements were taken from 50 healthy volunteers, using sonographic imaging under three different stress/load conditions. Stress/load was applied using the individuals’ bodyweight (low—seated; medium—bilaterally equal weight bearing in standing; and high—single leg standing). Digital images of the dLL captured using ultrasound were visualized to determine the dLL length. One-way repeated measures ANOVA was used to assess changes in the dLL length with load. Results The average dLL elongation, as percent resting length change, was 8.76% between seated and single leg standing positions. Most of the dLL elongation (6.26%) occurred between seated and bilateral standing. Conclusions The deformation and role of the dorsal Lisfranc ligament can be observed using sonographic imaging resulting from physiological loading in the clinical setting. Clinical Relevance These deformation parameters can be used to generate normative data for diagnostic purposes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is known to be useful to demonstrate Lisfranc ligament injury. There are few studies that report differences in MR imaging findings of acute or chronic Lisfranc ligament injuries. We applied oblique MR imaging planes parallel to the Lisfranc ligament for better visualization of the entire course of the ligament and assessed the detailed MR imaging appearances of the Lisfranc ligament in cadavers and patients with presumed Lisfranc injuries. Methods: Twelve preserved cadaveric feet were examined using a small-diameter surface coil. Long axis, oblique sagittal, and oblique short axis cross sections parallel to the Lisfranc ligament, dorsal ligament, and plantar ligament were obtained. Twenty-six MR examinations from 23 patients with suspected Lisfranc joint injuries were evaluated. Results: In the cadaveric study, the Lisfranc ligament was satisfactorily visible along its entire course in a single slice on long axis and oblique sagittal MR images. The dorsal ligament and the plantar ligament were visible separately from the Lisfranc ligament in oblique sagittal and oblique short axis planes. In the patient study, 11 MR examinations led to diagnoses of complete tears of the Lisfranc ligament that were acute injuries (3-21 days after trauma) mostly associated with disruption of the dorsal and plantar ligaments. Nine studies led to diagnoses of incomplete tears of the Lisfranc ligament that were chronic injuries (2-14 months after trauma). Recovery of the continuity of the disrupted ligament was observed in 3 patients. Conclusion: MR imaging demonstrated the integrity of the ligaments and was useful for diagnosing an acute Lisfranc injury. Fibrous healing of the torn ligament was observed in a chronic injury. Level of Evidence: Level IV, case series. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Only few procedures for Lisfranc ligaments reconstruction to treat subtle injury of the Lisfranc joint have been reported. We have developed a novel technique for Lisfranc ligaments reconstruction, which was applied to treat chronic symptomatic subtle injuries that had failed to respond to initial treatment or were misdiagnosed. This article describes the technique and its operative outcome in a small case series. Methods: Between April 2011 and October 2013, 5 (4 male and 1 female) athletes with a mean age of 19.4 (range 17-21) years were diagnosed with chronic subtle injury of the Lisfranc joint and underwent our novel reconstructive operation. In this technique, only a bone tunnel between the medial cuneiform and the second metatarsal bone is needed for near-anatomical reconstruction of the dorsal and interosseous ligaments. All patients were evaluated before and at 1 year after surgery using the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) scale for the ankle-midfoot. In addition, the interval between surgery and return to athletic activity, defined as return to near pre-injury performance level, was investigated. Results: Mean duration of postoperative follow-up was 18.8 (range 12-26) months. Mean AOFAS score improved significantly from 74.6 ± 2.5 (range 71-77) preoperatively to 96.0 ± 5.5 (range 90-100) at 1 year after the operation ( p < 0.01). All patients were able to return to their previous athletic activities and the interval between surgery and return to athletic activity was 16.8 ± 1.1 (range 15-18) weeks. There was no complication related to the operation. Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that our technique of Lisfranc ligaments reconstruction using autologous graft is effective for athletes with chronic subtle injury. Level of evidence: Level IV, retrospective case series. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on research which was conducted to assess the three dimensional anatomy of the Lisfranc ligament and its attachment sites. Researchers evaluated 37 cadaver feet that were dissected to expose the ligament attachments at the Lisfranc joint.They found that the Lisfranc ligament is variable in anatomy and can have a single or double-bundle arrangement and that its area of attachment is larger than that of the plantar ligament.

Background: The Lisfranc ligament plays an integral role in providing stability to the midfoot. Variable clinical presentations and radiographic findings make injuries to the Lisfranc ligament notoriously difficult to diagnose. Currently, radiographic evaluation is the mainstay in imaging such injuries; however, ultrasound has been suggested as a viable alternative. The objective of this study was to evaluate the intra-rater and inter-rater reliability in the measurement of the length of the dorsal Lisfranc ligament using ultrasound imaging in healthy, asymptomatic subjects. Methods: The dorsal Lisfranc ligaments of fifty asymptomatic subjects (n = 100 feet) were imaged using a Siemens SONOLINE Antares Ultrasound Imaging System© under low, medium, and high stress loads at 0° and 15° abducted foot positions. The lengths of the ligaments were measured, and Interclass correlation coefficients were used to calculate within-session intra-rater reliability (n = 100 feet) as well as between-session intra-rater reliability (n = 40 feet) and between-session inter-rater reliability (n = 40 feet). Results: The within-session intra-rater reliability results for dorsal Lisfranc ligament length had an average ICC of 0.889 (min 0.873 max 0.913). The average ICC for between-session intra-rater reliability was 0.747 (min 0.607 max 0.811). The average ICC for between-session inter-rater reliability was 0.685 (min 0.638 max 0.776). Conclusions: The measurement of the dorsal Lisfranc ligament length using ultrasound imaging shows substantial to almost perfect reliability when evaluating asymptomatic subjects. This imaging modality methodology shows promise and lays the foundation for further work in technique development towards the diagnostic identification of pathology within the Lisfranc ligament complex. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lisfranc complex injuries are a spectrum of midfoot and tarsometatarsal (TMT) joint trauma, more frequent in men and in the third decade of life. Depending on the severity of the trauma can range from purely ligamentous injuries, in low-energy trauma, to bone fracture-dislocations in high-energy trauma. A quick and careful diagnosis is crucial to optimize management and treatment, reducing complications and improving functional outcomes in the middle and long-term. Up to 20% of Lisfranc fractures are unnoticed or diagnosed late, above all low-energy trauma, mistaken for simple midfoot sprains. Therefore serious complications such as post-traumatic osteoarthritis and foot deformities are not uncommon. Clinically presenting with evident swelling of the midfoot and pain, often associated with joint instability of the midfoot. Plantar region ecchymosis is highly peculiar. First level of examination is X-Ray performed in 3 projections. CT scan is useful to detect nondisplaced fractures and minimal bone sub-dislocation. MRI is the gold standard for ligament injuries. The major current controversies in literature concern the management and treatment. In stable lesions and in those without dislocation, conservative treatment with immobilization and no weight-bearing is indicated for a period of 6 weeks. Displaced injuries have worse outcomes and require surgical treatment with the two main objectives of anatomical reduction and stability of the first three cuneiform-metatarsal joints. Different surgical procedures have been proposed from closed reduction and percutaneous surgery with K-wire or external fixation (EF), to open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with transarticular screw (TAS), to primary arthrodesis (PA) with dorsal plate (DP), up to a combination of these last 2 techniques. There is no superiority of one technique over the other, but what determines the post-operative outcomes is rather the anatomical reduction. However, the severity of the injury and a quick diagnosis are the main determinant of the biomechanical and functional long-term outcomes., Competing Interests: None., (IJPPP Copyright © 2022.)

Background: Early diagnosis is important in patients with Lisfranc joint injury to avoid subsequent complications. As the ligaments in the Lisfranc joint are relatively small and course obliquely, isotropic 3-dimensional (3D) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can be beneficial to evaluate ligament injury. The purpose of this study was to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of MRI, including isotropic 3D MRI for acute injury of the Lisfranc joint, especially of the interosseous C1-M2 ligament (Lisfranc ligament), the dorsal C1-M2 ligament (dorsal ligament), and the interosseous C1-C2 ligament, compared with direct operative observations., Methods: This retrospective review identified 27 patients who had undergone MR examination for acute Lisfranc joint injury followed by surgery. We reviewed the operative reports that described the Lisfranc, dorsal, and interosseous C1-C2 ligaments. All patients underwent an MRI, including a 2D oblique plane image parallel to the Lisfranc ligament and an isotropic 3D MRI. An image analysis of the integrity of the 3 ligaments and other associated injuries was performed. The diagnostic accuracy of MRI was analyzed using operative findings as a reference standard., Results: Lisfranc and dorsal ligament injuries were identified on MRI in all patients. MRI depicted disruption of the interosseous C1-C2 ligament in 12 patients. MRI diagnostic accuracy for detection of Lisfranc, dorsal, and interosseous C1-C2 ligaments was 100% (95% CI 0.82-1.0), 74% (95% CI 0.54-0.89), and 70% (95% CI 0.50-0.86), respectively., Conclusion: MRI with oblique planes parallel to the Lisfranc ligament and isotropic 3D MRI was reliable for detecting Lisfranc ligament injury, whereas MRI findings of the dorsal and interosseous C1-C2 ligaments were less consistent with operative observations., Level of Evidence: Level IV, case series., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. ICMJE forms for all authors are available online., (© The Author(s) 2022.)