Radiographic Assessment of Fibular Length Variance: The Case for "Fibula Minus".

Given the high prevalence of ankle fractures and morbidity of malalignment after fixation, an appropriate anatomic relationship between the distal fibula and adjacent tibia and talus is important. The tip of the lateral malleolus of the fibula has often been described to be at the level of the lateral talar process. However, no studies to date have examined the relationship of the distal fibular tip to the lateral process of the talus. We assessed 66 weightbearing mortise radiographs for variability of the distal fibular tip in relation to the lateral process of the talus. The subjects were all skeletally mature, with a mean age of 45.3 ± 14.6 years. We used a paired t test with a null hypothesis that the true mean difference in the distance from the distal fibula to the lateral process was equal to 0. The mean distance of the distal tip of the fibula was 0.257 ± 0.127 cm proximal to the tip of the lateral process of the talus. The 95% confidence interval was 0.226 to 0.288. Of the 66 subjects, 65 had the distal tip of the fibula proximal to the lateral process of the talus, corresponding to a negative fibular variance. In the remaining subject, the distal tip of the fibula was at the same level of the tip as the lateral process of the talus. The distal tip of the fibula is most commonly not at the level of the talus lateral process, as often described in published reports. Instead, it has a variance analogous to the relationship between the lengths of the ulna compared with the radius. The distal tip of the fibula in our study was more often proximal to the tip of the lateral process of the talus and can be described as a negative fibular variance, or "fibula minus."

Extraction of a Bent Tibial Nail After Refracture: A Case Report.

CASE: A 65-year-old man previously treated by intramedullary nailing for a left tibial shaft fracture presented 6 years later with an open refracture of his left tibia after a motorcycle accident. Treatment required extraction of the bent nail before revision nailing. CONCLUSIONS: Extraction of deformed intramedullary devices is a skill that will continue to be demanded of orthopaedic surgeons. In this case, standard extraction though the entry point proved successful. Standard extraction offers the safest form of removal and should be contemplated before considering more morbid methods of extraction while examining the fracture's morphology and the device's deformity.