Periprosthetic joint infection in total ankle replacement: which are the current diagnostic criteria?

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is among the most common complications of Total Ankle Replacement (TAR) and its management may be challenging. We set out to define which are the criteria currently used to diagnose PJI after TAR. METHODS: This PRISMA-compliant systematic review was registered in the Open Science Framework. Multiple databases were searched including clinical studies in which PJI after TAR was diagnosed and treated. Data were harvested regarding the cohort, the study design and the diagnostic criteria for PJI. Risk of bias was assessed using the modified Coleman Methodology Score (mCMS). RESULTS: Six papers (122 infected TARs) published between 2012 and 2022 were included in this review. Ankle pain with swelling and unexplained increased local temperature were the most common clinical findings leading to a suspicion of PJI. In 100% of cases the diagnosis was confirmed through synovial fluid analysis associated with positive blood tests. In all the revision surgeries intraoperative cultures (at least 3) were performed. In 109 ankles (90%) there was a microbiological isolation. Out of these, 38 (35%) were single organism infections by Staphylococcus coagulase negative and 37 (34%) were single organism infections by Staphylococcus Aureus. The mean mCMS was 37.6 out of 100. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of diagnostic criteria specific for PJI after TAR. Clinical and laboratory tests inspired to the knowledge in total knee and total hip arthroplasty are generally adopted in the field of ankle arthroplasty. The quality of evidence for studies included in this review was poor.

Treatment Approaches for Plantar Fasciopathy in Elite Athletes: A Scoping Review of the Literature.

Background: Plantar fasciopathy is a common orthopaedic condition that affects athletes and limits their performance. Purpose: To conduct a scoping review of the literature to summarize the evidence provided so far for the management of plantar fasciopathy in elite athletes and identify potential gaps in the current knowledge. Study Design: Scoping review; Level of evidence, 5. Methods: This scoping review followed the 6-stage methodological framework of Arksey and O'Malley and was registered in the Open Science Framework. PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were used to identify eligible articles. After charting of data, studies were pooled into 3 categories: epidemiological/diagnostic studies, outcome research focused on plantar fasciitis or partial tears, and studies on the rupture of the plantar fascia. The modified Coleman Methodology Score was used to assess the quality of included articles. Results: Of 742 initial studies, 10 were selected (109 patients): 8 level 4 articles and 2 level 5 articles. In 4 studies (91 athletes), potential risk factors were discussed but not investigated (ie, preexistent thickening of the fascia, spike shoes, varus hindfoot/knee alignment). In 3 studies (6 athletes) focusing on plantar fasciitis, the nonsurgical treatment led to a satisfactory but poorly documented outcome. In 3 studies (12 athletes), the rupture of the fascia was treated nonoperatively with contrasting results, while surgery was performed only in 2 cases. The mean modified Coleman Methodology Score was 19 (range, 3-42), demonstrating overall poor methodology. Conclusion: The limited number of studies and their poor quality do not allow to define the gold standard treatment of plantar fasciopathy in elite athletes. Until high-quality studies are provided, clinicians have to rely on the available literature regarding the nonprofessional or nonathletic population to make the best evidence-based decision.

Static versus dynamic fixation of distal tibiofibular syndesmosis: a systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses.

PURPOSE: Multiple Level I meta-analyses were conducted comparing traditional static vs. more recently introduced dynamic strategies of fixation for injuries of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis (TFS). The aim of this review was to assess their robustness and methodological quality, providing support in the choice of a treatment strategy in case of TFS injury using the highest level of evidence. METHODS: In this systematic review, conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, meta-analyses/systematic reviews comparing static and dynamic fixation methods after acute TFS injury were identified. The robustness of studies was evaluated using the fragility index (FI) for meta-analysis and the fragility quotient (FQ). The risk of bias was evaluated using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) instrument. Finally, the Jadad was applied to select the study which provided the highest quality of evidence to develop recommendations for the fixation strategy of these lesions. RESULTS: Out of 1.302 records, four Level I meta-analyses were included in this study. Analyzing the statistically significant dichotomous outcomes, the median FI was 3.5 (IQR, 2 to 5.5; range, 1 to 9), while the median FQ was 1.9% (IQR, 1 to 3.5; range 0.35 to 4.4). In total, 37% had an FI of 2 or less and 75% of outcomes had a FI of 4 or less. According to the AMSTAR score and Jadad algorithm, the largest meta-analysis was selected as the highest evidence provided so far. CONCLUSION: The meta-analyses with statistically significant dichotomous outcomes comparing dynamic and static fixation for treating injuries of the distal tibiofibular syndesmosis are fragile, with a change in less than four patients or less than 2% of the study population sufficient to reverse a significant outcome to nonsignificant. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I.