ABSTRACT
Background and Objectives: Lateral ankle injuries are commonly encountered injuries, and the open modified Broström operation (OMBO) is the primary treatment option. Recently, an arthroscopic modification of the Broström operation (AMBO) was developed; many studies have shown that there are no significant differences in clinical and radiological outcomes between the two surgical methods. However, no studies have been conducted comparing the two surgical methods in terms of return to play (RTP) time. This study assesses the time to RTP and the functional clinical outcomes. Materials and Methods: Sixty patients were enrolled from January 2012 to July 2014. They were segregated into two cohorts: the AMBO group comprised 30 patients, while the OMBO group comprised another 30 patients. Each participant underwent standardized treatment and rehabilitation regimens and RTP time was measured using seven questions that explored the times to return of painless walking, running, jumping, squatting, climbing stairs, and rising up on the heels and toes. We compared the time intervals from the onset of instability to the date of surgery. Clinical outcomes were evaluated before the surgery, 6 weeks after surgery, and 6 months after surgery. The assessments included the American Orthopedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot score, the pain visual analog scale (VAS) score, subjective satisfaction with rehabilitation, and activity level. Results: In terms of RTP, AMBO was associated with a shorter interval to walking without pain (7.07 ± 2.96 weeks) relative to OMBO (11.03 ± 8.58 weeks). No disparities were observed in the time to return to play (RTP) between OMBO and AMBO. While there were no discrepancies in the 6-month postoperative AOFAS or VAS scores, the 6-week postoperative VAS score was notably lower in the AMBO group compared to the OMBO group. AMBO provided a faster RTP in terms of two of the seven questions in a group exhibiting high-level physical activity. The rate of subjective satisfaction with rehabilitation was higher for AMBO than for OMBO. Conclusions: Aside from walking, the duration to return to play and the clinical outcomes were similar between AMBO and OMBO treatments for lateral ankle instability. AMBO is a good treatment option and should be carefully considered for athletes with lateral ankle instability. AMBO demonstrated positive outcomes in a group with higher activity levels compared to others, particularly in terms of time to RTP, subjective satisfaction, and postoperative pain.