The clinical outcome comparison between trans-syndesmotic fixation and anatomic deltoid ligament repair in unstable ankle fractures with medial clear space widening: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND Due to the variability in evidence supporting either trans-syndesmosis fixation or deltoid ligament repair in unstable ankle fractures with medical clear space (MCS) widening makes it unclear which surgical technique leads to the best patient outcomes. The goal of our systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare clinical outcomes of trans-syndesmotic fixation versus anatomic deltoid ligament repair in the management of unstable ankle fractures with MCS widening. METHODS Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were utilized in this study. A comprehensive and systematic search was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases. Outcomes investigated in this review included the rates of syndesmotic malreduction, removal of hardware, postoperative complications including wound issues, and functional/pain scores. RESULTS A total of five level-3 studies were selected in this review, with 280 unstable ankle fractures with MCS widening: 165 for the trans-syndesmotic fixation group and 115 for the anatomic deltoid ligament repair group. Three out of five studies evaluated syndesmotic malreduction using CT. Compared to the trans-syndesmosis fixation group, the deltoid repair group showed significant lower rates of syndesmotic malreduction rates and removal of hardware: 6.5 % (4/61) Vs. 27 % (16/59) (RR=0.26, 95 % CI=[0.10, 0.68]), and 2.6 % (3/115) Vs.54.5 % (90/165) (RR=0.06, CI=[0.02, 0.14]), respectively. No significant differences were found between the two groups in postoperative wound complications, reoperations, and functional scores including AOFAS and VAS pain score. CONCLUSIONS Based on our findings, anatomic deltoid ligament repair was associated with a lower rate of syndesmotic malreduction and the need for hardware removal while there was no significant difference in terms of postoperative wound complications, reoperation, AOFAS score, or VAS pain score. These results should be interpreted with caution due to limitations related to heterogeneity among the studies. Further high-level RCTs with larger sample sizes are necessary to establish a robust consensus.