Open Reduction Syndesmosis Tightrope Versus Screw Fixation

NCT ID: NCT02199249

Last Updated: 2018-02-08

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

103 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2015-04-30

Study Completion Date

2017-09-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Tibia-fibular syndesmosis injury occurs in a significant proportion of ankle injuries and is assumed to disrupt the syndesmotic ligaments.

The goal of operative treatment is to reduce the ankle mortise to restore normal joint kinematics. Syndesmosis repair can be performed using either open or closed reduction, combined with fixation between the distal tibia and fibula. Closed fixation has demonstrated high rates of non anatomic reductions greater than 40%; therefore, open reduction will be performed in this study. Screw fixation is stable but concerns exist regarding potential excess rigidity.

Recently, flexible fixation techniques combined with anatomic reduction have demonstrated improvements in functional outcomes and reduction quality. Both open reduction and flexible TightRope fixation have considerable support in the literature in cohort studies but have not been compared to open screw fixation in a randomized controlled trial.

In this multi centre randomized study, radiographic, economic and functional outcomes are compared between \[open reduction, flexible Tightrope syndesmosis fixation (OT)\] and \[open reduction screw fixation (OS)\] of the syndesmosis.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Tibia-fibular syndesmosis injury occurs in a significant proportion of ankle injuries and is assumed to disrupt the syndesmotic ligaments. The goal of operative treatment is to reduce the ankle mortise to restore normal joint kinematics. Syndesmosis repair can be performed using either open or closed reduction, combined with fixation between the distal tibia and fibula. Closed fixation has demonstrated high rates of non anatomic reductions greater than 40%; therefore, open reduction will be performed in this study. Screw fixation is stable but concerns exist regarding potential excess rigidity.

Recently, flexible fixation techniques combined with anatomic reduction have demonstrated improvements in functional outcomes and reduction quality. Both open reduction and flexible TightRope fixation have considerable support in the literature in cohort studies but have not been compared to open screw fixation in a randomized controlled trial.

This study is a multi centre randomized controlled trial comparing clinical, economic and functional outcomes between open reduction, flexible Tightrope syndesmosis fixation (OT) to open reduction rigid screw fixation (OS) for syndesmotic injuries in high ankle fractures, involving the fibula 1 cm above the level of the syndesmosis (Weber C (OTA 44.C1, 44.C2, 44C3)).

We anticipate recruiting 72 patients (36 in each arm) from up to 20 clinical sites across North America. Post operative follow up will occur at 2 and 6 weeks, 3, 6, and 12 months. At each follow up, radiographic and functional outcomes will be assessed as well as documentation of costs associated with treatment and rehabilitation.

The research questions that this study will answer include the following:

1. Does open reduction and repair with TightRope syndesmosis fixation (OT) provide better reduction compared to open reduction and syndesmosis screw fixation (OS)?
2. Which surgical technique provides better functional outcomes?
3. Are complications and costs associated with repair comparable between surgical techniques?

The null hypothesis is that there will be no difference between the treatment groups in terms of reduction and functional testing.

The scientific aims of this study are to compare:

1. anatomic (open) reduction between the two groups using CT scan and plain radiographs.
2. post-operative pain and functional performance in each group.
3. rates of complications and costs for each method of fixation.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Ankle Fractures

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

SINGLE_GROUP

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Open Reduction Tightrope fixation (OT)

Device: Following fixation of Weber C fibular fracture according to AO standards, the syndesmosis will be stabilized by open reduction followed by use of a single Tightrope (Arthrex-Knotless) device. Open Reduction Tightrope fixation (OT)

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Open reduction Tightrope fixation

Intervention Type DEVICE

Device: Following fixation of Weber C fibular fracture according to AO standards, the syndesmosis will be stabilized by open reduction followed by use of a single Tightrope (Arthrex-Knotless) device. Open Reduction Tightrope fixation (OT)

Open Reduction screw fixation (OS)

Device: Following fixation of Weber C fibular fracture according to AO standards, the syndesmosis will be stabilized by open reduction followed by use of two or more syndesmosis screws. Open Reduction screw fixation (OS)

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

open reduction screw fixation

Intervention Type DEVICE

Device: Following fixation of Weber C fibular fracture according to AO standards, the syndesmosis will be stabilized by open reduction followed by use of two or more syndesmosis screws. Open Reduction screw fixation (OS)

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Open reduction Tightrope fixation

Device: Following fixation of Weber C fibular fracture according to AO standards, the syndesmosis will be stabilized by open reduction followed by use of a single Tightrope (Arthrex-Knotless) device. Open Reduction Tightrope fixation (OT)

Intervention Type DEVICE

open reduction screw fixation

Device: Following fixation of Weber C fibular fracture according to AO standards, the syndesmosis will be stabilized by open reduction followed by use of two or more syndesmosis screws. Open Reduction screw fixation (OS)

Intervention Type DEVICE

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Athrex tightrope syndesmosis screw fixation

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

1. Male or female 18yrs with a diagnosis of a closed Weber C ankle (OTA 44.C1, 44.C2, 44.C3) fracture.
2. Randomization and treatment of syndesmosis injury within 14 days of the date of injury.
3. Demonstrates lateral subluxation of talus on x-ray or stress views. Talar shift \> 1mm or medial clear space widening ≥ 5mm (unstable)
4. No history of previous severe ankle injury, pathologic fracture, ligamentous laxity, no prior diagnosis or current treatment of osteoporosis or metabolic bone disease.
5. No concurrent injury that is deemed by the treating surgeon to delay or alter the rehabilitation protocol for the ankle injury.
6. No neuromuscular or sensory deficiency.
7. Able to understand and complete assessments
8. Provision of Informed Consent

Exclusion Criteria

1. Age \< 18 years
2. Open fracture or pathological fracture.
3. Talar shift \< 1mm or medial clear space widening \< 5mm (stable)
4. Prior diagnosis or current treatment for osteoporosis or metabolic bone disease.
5. Concurrent injury that is deemed by the treating surgeon to delay or alter the rehabilitation protocol for the ankle injury.
6. Prior diagnosis or treatment for neuromuscular disease or sensory deficiency (i.e. diabetic neuropathy).
7. Likely problems, in the judgment of the investigator, with maintaining follow-up (i.e. patients with no fixed address, patients incapable of providing informed consent, prisoners etc.).
8. Patients who are currently pregnant or planning to become pregnant during the study duration.
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Orthopaedic Trauma Association

OTHER

Sponsor Role collaborator

London Health Sciences Centre Research Institute OR Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph's

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

David Sanders

Md, FRCSC

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

David Sanders, MD

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

London Health Sciences Centre Research Institute OR Lawson Research Institute of St. Joseph's

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

London Health Sciences Centre

London, Ontario, Canada

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Canada

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Wong MT, Wiens C, LaMothe J, Edwards WB, Schneider PS. In Vivo Syndesmotic Motion After Rigid and Flexible Fixation Using 4-Dimensional Computerized Tomography. J Orthop Trauma. 2022 May 1;36(5):257-264. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000002267.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 35594514 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

105500

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.