Return to Play After Low-Energy Lisfranc Injuries in High-Demand Individuals: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Athletes and Active Military Personnel.

BACKGROUND: Although studies are available on high-energy Lisfranc injuries, the evidence for increasingly reported low-energy Lisfranc injuries in active individuals, including athletes and military personnel, remains scarce and mostly retrospective. PURPOSE: This meta-analysis aimed to review the return-to-play (RTP) and return-to-duty (RTD) rates with regard to the anatomic type and the management of low-energy Lisfranc injuries in a high-demand, active population. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, we searched the MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases through June 2019 to identify studies on low-energy Lisfranc injuries in athletes and military personnel. The primary outcomes were RTP/RTD rates and time to RTP/RTD, and the secondary outcomes were time missed from practice, games missed, time to full recovery, midfoot arthritis rate, and reoperation rate. RESULTS: Overall, 15 studies (N = 441 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Of these, 6 studies were of level 3 evidence, 8 studies were level 4 (case series), and 1 study was level 5. Of the 441 subjects, 380 (86.17%) were able to RTP and RTD. There was no statistically significant difference in RTP rates for operative versus nonoperative treatment, ORIF versus PA, or bony versus ligamentous injuries. The mean time missed from practice/duty for operative versus nonoperative treatment was 58.02 days (95% CI, 13.6-102.4 days; I 2 = 98.03%) and 116.4 days (95% CI, 62.4-170.4 days; I 2 = 99.45%), respectively. The mean time missed from practice/duty for bony versus ligamentous injury was 98.9 days (95% CI, 6.1-191.7 days; I 2 = 99.82%) and 76.5 days (95% CI, 37.9-115.02 days; I 2 = 99.83%), respectively, with no statistically significant differences (standardized mean difference = 3.62 days [95% CI: -5.7 to 13 days]; I 2 = 83.17%). CONCLUSION: This review indicated an overall excellent RTP/RTD rate for low-energy Lisfranc injuries in high-demand individuals. The time missed from athletic participation/military duty was not affected by injury treatment type, the bony versus ligamentous nature of the injury, or athlete player position. However, the low evidence levels and significant heterogeneity of the included studies precludes making conclusions regarding length of time missed or optimal management. Higher-quality studies on low-energy Lisfranc injuries are needed.