Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Suture Button Versus Fibulink Fixation for Acute Ankle Syndesmosis Injuries
NCT ID: NCT05626036
Last Updated: 2024-05-06
Study Results
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.
RECRUITING
NA
50 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2022-12-01
2024-12-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The gold standard for syndesmosis fixation has traditionally been screw fixation. However, issues with screw fixation include screw breakage, screw loosening, reoperation, and malreduction. Due to growing concerns with static screw fixation, implants based on the flexible suture button design, such as the TightRope system, gained traction.
The Fibulink Syndesmosis Repair System, a relatively new design that became clinically available in 2017, has showed promising results.
To our knowledge, there is no study that directly compares outcomes with the Fibulink implant to suture button implants.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Static Implant Versus Dynamic Implant in the Surgical Treatment on Ankle Syndesmosis Rupture
NCT01109303
Comparison of Gait in Syndesmosis Injuries Treated With Screw Fixation vs Suture Button
NCT04972578
Tightrope or Screw Fixation of Acute Tibiofibular Syndesmotic Injury
NCT01275924
A Cohort Study of Bioabsorbable Screws for Syndesmosis Fixation Fixation in Ankle Fracture
NCT05662449
Ziptight or Tricortical Screw Fixation of Acute Tibiofibular Syndesmotic Injury
NCT02930486
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The gold standard for syndesmosis fixation has traditionally been screw fixation5. However, issues with screw fixation include screw breakage, screw loosening, reoperation, and malreduction6-8. This has been speculated to be a result of the ankle syndesmosis, a dynamic construct, being inappropriately fixed with static fixation. Due to growing concerns with static screw fixation, implants based on the flexible suture button design, such as the TightRope system, gained traction. Advantages with these designs include superior outcome scores, as well as lower rates of osteoarthritis and reoperation7,9,10. However, despite achieving improved joint mechanics, these systems have their drawbacks as well, such as infection or damage to the superficial medial neurovascular bundle9.
The Fibulink Syndesmosis Repair System, a relatively new design that became clinically available in 2017, has showed promising results. It has been promoted as an implant that potentially provides both the fixation of a screw and flexibility of a suture to respect the dynamic nature of the ankle joint. Benefits of this design include eliminating damage to the medial neurovascular bundle and soft tissues, promoting physiologic motion of the ankle joint, and allowing improved tension control. In a case series with 14 patients that received the Fibulink implant, Desai found no complications with a mean follow-up of 9.5 months9. However, more long-term data is needed in order to draw any conclusions. The potential advantage of this system over suture button designs is that it incorporates the rigidity of screw fixation on top of the dynamic fixation of suture button implants. It also addresses the limitations of suture button designs, such as avoiding medial soft tissue disruption and lack of two-way tension control.
The comparison between screw fixation and suture button designs has been thoroughly investigated in the literature. To our knowledge, there is no study that directly compares outcomes with the Fibulink implant to suture button implants. It is imperative to directly compare these methods so we can definitively assess their suitability and provide patients that sustain these injuries the best method of fixation in order to improve patient outcomes.
The purpose of this study is to compare radiographic and clinical outcomes in patients who sustain an acute ankle fracture with an associated syndesmosis injury by comparing two surgical treatments currently in the practice of the study investigators. The study will compare suture button fixation versus Fibulink implant in patients with this injury.
Inadequate syndesmosis fixation has been found to result in significant morbidity to patients, including persistent pain, instability, and post-traumatic arthritis. This emphasizes the need to assess the available methods of fixation in order to minimize negative long-term consequences. Currently, standard single screw fixation remains a common choice among orthopaedic surgeons. However, there is some evidence of superior outcomes with dynamic fixation, using designs such as the suture button or the Fibulink system, in terms of functional results, residual pain, and other measures. With an enhanced understanding of patient outcomes with these methods of fixation, we will better be able to determine more effective ways to manage these injures and offer guidance for optimal management and patient satisfaction.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Arthrex Tightrope
Syndesmosis fixation performed with Arthrex Tightrope device. This is a high-tension suture fixation with a button based anchor system.
Arthrex Tightrope
High-tensile strength suture syndesmosis repair
Synthes Fibulink
Syndesmosis fixation performed with Synthes Fibulink device. This is a high-tension suture fixation with a screw based anchor system.
Synthes Fibulink
High-tensile strength suture syndesmosis repair
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Arthrex Tightrope
High-tensile strength suture syndesmosis repair
Synthes Fibulink
High-tensile strength suture syndesmosis repair
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Age 18 years or older
* Ability to understand the content of the patient information/Informed consent form
Exclusion Criteria
* Patient preference for specific implant
* Refusal of randomization
* Pregnant patients
* Prisoners
* Participation in any other pharmacologic or medicinal product study within the previous month that could influence the results of this study
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
United States Naval Medical Center, San Diego
FED
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Benjamin Wheatley
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Benjamin Wheatley
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
NMCSD
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Naval Medical Center San Diego
San Diego, California, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Ashley Hughey
Role: primary
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Lindsjo U. Operative treatment of ankle fractures. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl. 1981;189:1-131. doi: 10.3109/ort.1981.52.suppl-189.01.
Court-Brown CM, McBirnie J, Wilson G. Adult ankle fractures--an increasing problem? Acta Orthop Scand. 1998 Feb;69(1):43-7. doi: 10.3109/17453679809002355.
Sagi HC, Shah AR, Sanders RW. The functional consequence of syndesmotic joint malreduction at a minimum 2-year follow-up. J Orthop Trauma. 2012 Jul;26(7):439-43. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e31822a526a.
Ray R, Koohnejad N, Clement ND, Keenan GF. Ankle fractures with syndesmotic stabilisation are associated with a high rate of secondary osteoarthritis. Foot Ankle Surg. 2019 Apr;25(2):180-185. doi: 10.1016/j.fas.2017.10.005. Epub 2017 Oct 28.
Bava E, Charlton T, Thordarson D. Ankle fracture syndesmosis fixation and management: the current practice of orthopedic surgeons. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2010 May;39(5):242-6.
Gardner MJ, Demetrakopoulos D, Briggs SM, Helfet DL, Lorich DG. Malreduction of the tibiofibular syndesmosis in ankle fractures. Foot Ankle Int. 2006 Oct;27(10):788-92. doi: 10.1177/107110070602701005.
Laflamme M, Belzile EL, Bedard L, van den Bekerom MP, Glazebrook M, Pelet S. A prospective randomized multicenter trial comparing clinical outcomes of patients treated surgically with a static or dynamic implant for acute ankle syndesmosis rupture. J Orthop Trauma. 2015 May;29(5):216-23. doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000000245.
Naqvi GA, Cunningham P, Lynch B, Galvin R, Awan N. Fixation of ankle syndesmotic injuries: comparison of tightrope fixation and syndesmotic screw fixation for accuracy of syndesmotic reduction. Am J Sports Med. 2012 Dec;40(12):2828-35. doi: 10.1177/0363546512461480. Epub 2012 Oct 10.
Raeder BW, Figved W, Madsen JE, Frihagen F, Jacobsen SB, Andersen MR. Better outcome for suture button compared with single syndesmotic screw for syndesmosis injury: five-year results of a randomized controlled trial. Bone Joint J. 2020 Feb;102-B(2):212-219. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.102B2.BJJ-2019-0692.R2.
Provided Documents
Download supplemental materials such as informed consent forms, study protocols, or participant manuals.
Document Type: Informed Consent Form
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
21-14036
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.