Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics (Dec 2023)

Effect of Distal Tibiofibular Syndesmosis Overcompression on the Biomechanical Properties of the Ankle Bones: An In Vitro Cadaveric Model

  • Walter C. Hembree MD,
  • Daina M. Brooks MEM,
  • Byron Rosenthal BS,
  • Carlynn Winters BS,
  • Jordan Pasternack MD,
  • Bryan W. Cunningham PhD

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/2473011423S00295
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 8

Abstract

Read online

Category: Trauma; Ankle Introduction/Purpose: Overtightening of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis during open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) of ankle fractures remains a clinical concern, and there are limited data delineating the effect of syndesmosis overcompression on subsequent range of motion of the ankle joint bones. The primary objective of the current study was to determine the effect of syndesmotic overcompression on the relative range of motion (ROM) of the tibia, fibula, and talus, and to determine the syndesmotic fixation construct that most accurately restores native motion. Methods: Ten cadaveric lower limbs were utilized (78.3±13.0 yrs, 4F; 6M). A musculoskeletal simulator at ±7.5 Nm was used to test flexibility in dorsiflexion-plantarflexion, inversion-eversion, and internal-external rotation. After intact testing, syndesmotic probes were used to arthroscopically measure the intact position of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis. The force needed to compress the syndesmosis just beyond the intact position represented the intact force (100%), and overcompression was defined as 150% of the intact force. The anterior inferior tibiofibular ligament (AITFL), interosseus membrane (IOM), and posterior inferior tibiofibular ligament (PITFL) were then sectioned. Testing was repeated for destabilized, IOM reconstruction at 100% compression and 150% overcompression, IOM reconstruction plus AITFL fixation at 100% compression and 150% overcompression, and AITFL fixation alone. ROM data was reported as a percentage of the intact condition. Repeated measures ANOVA and Bonferroni post hoc test were performed to assess differences between conditions with p0.05). Changes in the proximal tibiofibular ROM were similar in magnitude and direction as the distal tibiofibular ROM for all conditions. Conclusion: In the current study, overcompression of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis did not restrict relative ROM of the tibia, fibula, or talus. Reconstructing the AITFL in addition to the IOM decreased tibiofibular ROM, particularly in the axial plane. In the clinical setting, surgical reconstruction with dynamic fixation of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis may result in increased ROM and mechanical stress at the proximal tibiofibular articulation.