A Comparison of Trans-Articular Screw Versus Dorsal Bridge Plate Versus Compression Locking Plate Fixation in B2 Lis Franc Injuries: A 5-Year Experience in a Level 1 Trauma Center, in the United Kingdom

Abstract

This retrospective case series aimed to identify whether trans-articular screws, dorsal bridging plates or if a 4-corner compression plate offers better functional outcome after B2 Lis Franc injuries. Thirty-eight patients underwent surgical fixation for these injuries over 5 years in a Level 1 Trauma Centre. Patients were treated in 1 of 3 treatment arms: trans-articular screw, dorsal bridge plate, or 4-corner compression plate fixation. The primary outcome measures were the Manchester Oxford Foot and Ankle Questionnaire and the Euroqol- 5DL score and surgical results included postoperative complications and further surgery. Injury type, energy of mechanism, and open versus closed status were not significantly different within any fixation group. We achieved 94.7% (n = 36) good anatomical reduction. Finding significant improvement between plate fixation (both types) versus trans-articular screw groups treatment functional outcomes. A clinically crucial improvement in Manchester Oxford Foot & Ankle Questionnaire scores, and improved Euroqol- 5DL outcomes between 4-corner compression plate and trans-articular screw group. Overall, there was no significant difference in metalware failure, metalware removal and soft tissue complications. This study concludes that functional outcomes after Lis Franc fractures are not just dependent on the quality of anatomical reduction but are affected by fixation type. Further studies are required to provide qualitative analysis and assessment of dorsal bridge plate fixation versus 4-corner plate. Significantly, we have seen the 4-corner compression plate group reached the minimum clinically meaningful difference in the Manchester Oxford Foot and Ankle Questionnaire when compared to trans-articular screw fixation.