Henri L B Ullmann, Tamara Munoz, Wei Shao Tung, Gregory Waryasz, Christopher W DiGiovanni, Lorena Bejarano-Pineda
{"title":"The Role of Fibrocartilage Preservation in Retromalleolar Groove Deepening for Peroneal Tendon Instability.","authors":"Henri L B Ullmann, Tamara Munoz, Wei Shao Tung, Gregory Waryasz, Christopher W DiGiovanni, Lorena Bejarano-Pineda","doi":"10.1177/19386400261471644","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>BackgroundSurgery is often indicated for peroneal tendon dislocation as conservative treatment carries a high recurrence rate. Direct retromalleolar groove deepening removes the fibrocartilage layer, whereas fibrocartilage-preserving techniques are more complex and their clinical benefit is uncertain. This study compared outcomes between these approaches for peroneal tendon instability.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 54 patients (21 direct, 33 fibrocartilage-preserving) who underwent retromalleolar groove deepening with ≥6 months follow-up. Outcomes were residual symptoms, recurrent instability, revision surgery, and return to activity. Analyses were descriptive, reporting effect sizes with 95% confidence intervals.ResultsNo statistically significant differences were detected between direct and fibrocartilage-preserving techniques in residual symptoms (52.4% vs 63.6%, P = .75), recurrent instability (4.8% vs 6.1%, P = .64), revision surgery (4.8% vs 3.0%, P = .55), or return to preoperative activity among those active pre-injury (40.0% vs 44.4%, P = 1.00).ConclusionIn this retrospective cohort, direct groove deepening achieved outcomes comparable to fibrocartilage-preserving techniques while offering a simpler procedure. High residual symptom rates in both groups suggest that factors beyond fibrocartilage integrity may be relevant for outcome.Level of Evidence:<i>Level III</i>.</p>","PeriodicalId":73046,"journal":{"name":"Foot & ankle specialist","volume":" ","pages":"19386400261471644"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foot & ankle specialist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/19386400261471644","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
BackgroundSurgery is often indicated for peroneal tendon dislocation as conservative treatment carries a high recurrence rate. Direct retromalleolar groove deepening removes the fibrocartilage layer, whereas fibrocartilage-preserving techniques are more complex and their clinical benefit is uncertain. This study compared outcomes between these approaches for peroneal tendon instability.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 54 patients (21 direct, 33 fibrocartilage-preserving) who underwent retromalleolar groove deepening with ≥6 months follow-up. Outcomes were residual symptoms, recurrent instability, revision surgery, and return to activity. Analyses were descriptive, reporting effect sizes with 95% confidence intervals.ResultsNo statistically significant differences were detected between direct and fibrocartilage-preserving techniques in residual symptoms (52.4% vs 63.6%, P = .75), recurrent instability (4.8% vs 6.1%, P = .64), revision surgery (4.8% vs 3.0%, P = .55), or return to preoperative activity among those active pre-injury (40.0% vs 44.4%, P = 1.00).ConclusionIn this retrospective cohort, direct groove deepening achieved outcomes comparable to fibrocartilage-preserving techniques while offering a simpler procedure. High residual symptom rates in both groups suggest that factors beyond fibrocartilage integrity may be relevant for outcome.Level of Evidence:Level III.
背景:腓骨肌腱脱位的保守治疗复发率高,手术治疗是常见的治疗方法。踝后沟直接加深可去除纤维软骨层,而保留纤维软骨的技术更为复杂,其临床效果尚不确定。本研究比较了两种入路治疗腓骨肌腱不稳的结果。方法回顾性分析54例进行踝后沟加深手术的患者,其中直接手术21例,保留纤维软骨33例,随访≥6个月。结果为残余症状、复发性不稳定、翻修手术和恢复活动。分析是描述性的,用95%的置信区间报告效应量。结果直接保留纤维软骨技术与保留纤维软骨技术的残留症状差异无统计学意义(52.4% vs 63.6%, P =。75),复发性不稳定(4.8% vs 6.1%, P =。64),翻修手术(4.8% vs 3.0%, P =。55),或恢复术前活动(40.0% vs 44.4%, P = 1.00)。结论:在这一回顾性队列研究中,直接加深沟取得了与保留纤维软骨技术相当的结果,同时提供了一个更简单的手术。两组患者的高残留症状率提示纤维软骨完整性以外的因素可能与预后有关。证据等级:三级。