Effect of CT on Management Plan in Malleolar Ankle Fractures

37Citations
Citations of this article
60Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Background: Conventionally ankle fractures have been classified using plain radiographs. Because of complex 3-dimensional anatomy and complexity of injuries, plain radiographs may not always be able to clearly depict the complete fracture pattern. There is a paucity of studies regarding the utility of computed tomography (CT) scanning in malleolar ankle fractures (MAFs). Hence, we conducted this study to further understand the role of the CT scan in MAFs. Methods: A prospective study of 56 consecutive malleolar ankle fractures was conducted. In the first evaluation by a team of 3 observers, a management plan was made based on plain radiographs. All patients received a CT scan evaluation with a standard protocol. The second evaluation by the same team included formulating an operative plan based on the CT. Results: In 13 (23.2%) cases, the management plan changed after CT evaluation. In most of the cases, the change in the management plan included an alteration in fixation of the posterior malleolus followed by lateral malleolus in 4 cases. Most of the changes took place in AO 44 type C followed by types B and A. Maximum change was noted in trimalleolar fractures followed by bimalleolar and unimalleolar. The most common morphological characteristic fracture identified on CT scan that was not evident on plain radiography was Chaput fracture in 17 cases. Conclusion: CT scan evaluation of MAFs changed the management plan in a significant number of cases, especially if the fractured fragment included a posterior malleolus, AO type C, and/or if 2 or more malleoli were fractured as noted on plain x rays. Level of Evidence: Level IV, case series.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kumar, A., Mishra, P., Tandon, A., Arora, R., & Chadha, M. (2018). Effect of CT on Management Plan in Malleolar Ankle Fractures. Foot and Ankle International, 39(1), 59–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071100717732746

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free