Influence of different osteosynthesis procedures and included joint pockets on the clinical and functional outcome after Lisfranc arthrodesis

• Conditions: M19.07

• Registration Number: DRKS00012635
• Lead Sponsor: Medizinische Hochschule Hannover

Brief Summary

Not available

Detailed Description

Not available

Study Timeline

• Study Completion: 2018-06-01
• Study Start: 2019-07-01
• Results First Posted: 2021-02-06
• Last Update Posted: 19 August 2024

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: Complete
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 69

Inclusion Criteria

Performed arthrodesis of at least 2 articular TMT and / or intercuneiform in domo

Exclusion Criteria

Younger than 18 years, wheelchair user, further arthrodeses NC / TN / CC / USG / OSG

Study & Design

• Study Type: observational
• Study Design: Not specified

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
On the basis of the clinical scores (American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Score, Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS), SF-36, University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) activity scale) and the revision rate, the clinical outcome after Lisfranc arthrodesis is generally to be assessed well. There should be a difference between the pre- and postoperative state.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
There are differences in clinical and functional outcome with the use of pure screw arthrodesis, additive plate osteosynthesis, or different plate systems, especially with regard to revision / pseudoarthrosis.