RESUMO
PURPOSE: Ankle sprains remain the most common soft tissue injury presenting to Emergency Departments. Recently, there has been increased awareness and reporting of deltoid ligament injuries in association with injuries to the lateral ligament complex as well as with fibula fractures. This article reviews the currently available literature on the anatomy of the deltoid ligament, clinical and radiological diagnosis of injuries to the deltoid ligament and treatment recommendations. METHODS: A literature review was conducted for keywords associated with deltoid ligament injuries. MEDLINE, PubMed and Embase databases were utilised for this search. Articles were included if involving an adult population, were English-language, were related to deltoid ligament injuries (with or without associated injuries) and reported on patho-anatomy, clinical or radiological diagnosis or treatment methods. RESULTS: A total of 93 articles were assessed for relevance from the database search, and 47 were included after the removal of irrelevant articles and duplicates. Several studies reported on the clinical findings of deltoid ligament injury, as well as the radiographic analysis. Arthroscopy was considered the gold standard of diagnosis, with authors reporting on the potential benefit of performing arthroscopic repair or reconstruction at the same time. There were no studies that provided a system for the classification of deltoid ligament injury or larger studies of treatment pathways. Long-term studies of the incidence of instability in deltoid ligament injuries were not available. CONCLUSION: There is limited evidence available regarding deltoid ligament injuries, particularly in terms of treatment options, either in isolation or with concomitant injuries. Long-term follow-up studies are needed to obtain more accurate data on the number of complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: This prospective study aims to determine the role of ultrasound (US) in diagnosing different types of ankle impingement due to osseous and soft tissue pathologies and to compare the results with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which is considered our gold standard. METHODS: The study population included 90 patients with unilateral ankle pain who presented with symptoms and signs suggestive of ankle impingement. Their age ranged from 17 to 57 years, with a mean age of 33.7 years. Using US and MRI, our cases were classified into bony and soft tissue ankle impingement. They were further classified according to the anatomical compartments affected, into anteromedial, anterior, anterolateral, posteromedial, and posterior. RESULTS: 90 patients were enrolled in this study: 51 males and 39 females. In our study, posterior ankle impingement was the commonest impingement type, while anteromedial ankle impingement was the rarest type, followed by posteromedial impingement. The accuracy of US in diagnosing osseous impingement was found to have the following: sensitivity 70.37%, specificity 100%, PPV 100%, NPV 75%, accuracy 84.31%, and p value < 0.001; meanwhile, the accuracy of US in diagnosing soft tissue impingement was found to have the following: sensitivity 83.33%, specificity 100%, PPV 100%, NPV 87.10%, accuracy 92.16%, and p value < 0.001. CONCLUSION: US is a good diagnostic tool in bone and soft tissue impingements, with a significant p value of 0.001 for both. US cannot replace MRI as a diagnostic tool, but as a widely available imaging modality, it can save time and cost and allows dynamic imaging.
