• Journal of Korean Orthopaedic Sports Medicine
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.69-77
• /
• 2011

Purpose: This study was retrospectively performed to compare the clinical outcomes of modified Brostrom procedures using the single suture anchor and the double suture anchor for chronic lateral ankle instability. Materials and Methods: Thirty-seven patients were followed up for more than 1 year after the modified Brostrom procedures using suture anchor. Single surgeon treated seventeen cases with single suture anchor and 20 cases with double suture anchor. The clinical evaluation was performed according to the Karlsson scale and Sefton grading system. Radiologic measurement of the talar tilt and anterior talar translation was performed through anterior and varus stress radiographs using Telos device. Results: The Karlsson scale had improved significantly from preoperative average of 45.2 points to 89.4 points in single suture anchor group, and from 46.4 points to 90.5 points in double suture anchor group. According to the Sefton grading system, 15 cases (88.2%) in single suture anchor group and 18 cases (90%) in double suture anchor group achieved satisfactory results. The talar tilt angle and anterior talar translation had improved significantly from preoperative average of $13.6^{\circ}$ and 8.6 mm to $5.4^{\circ}$ and 4.1 mm in single suture anchor group, from $14.1^{\circ}$ and 8.4mm to $3.9^{\circ}$ and 4 mm in double suture anchor group. Double suture anchor technique was significantly superior in postoperative talar tilt. Conclusion: Single and double suture anchor techniques produced similar clinical and functional outcomes except for talar tilt, which was significantly superior in double suture anchor group. Both modified Brostrom procedures using the single and double suture anchor appear to be effective treatment methods for chronic lateral ankle instability. Further evaluation of clinical outcomes and biomechanical studies in athletes are needed.

• The Academic Congress of Korean Shoulder and Elbow Society
• /
• 2008.03a
• /
• pp.179-179
• /
• 2008

For a partial tear of the subscapularis tendon, the presenting technique requires only the anterior portal for preparing the footprint and suture management, as well as the subclavian portal for placing the suture anchor and suture hook without inserting a cannula. It provides both a good angle for anchor placement and sufficient space for managing the upper portion of a subscapularis tendon tear. A spinal needle was inserted through the subclavian portal in order to identify the appropriate angle for placing the suture anchor. A 3-mm incision was made for the subclavian portal and a biosuture anchor was placed on the footprint portion of the subscapularis tendon. In order to avoid crowding, each limb of both strands of the biosuture anchor were passed through the tendon- posteromedial side first, and anterolateral side second, using a switching technique with suture hook embedded with no.1 PDS. A suture tie was applied in a reverse sequence (the lateral strand first and the medial strand second) through the anterior cannula using a sliding technique.

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.21 no.4
• /
• pp.246-251
• /
• 2018

Compared to single row repair, use of lateral row anchors in suture bridge rotator cuff repair enhances repair strength and increases footprint contact area. If a lateral knotless anchor (push-in design) is inserted into osteoporotic bone, pull-out of the lateral row anchor can developed. However, failures of lateral row anchors have been reported at several months after surgery. In our cases, even though complete cuff healing occurred, delayed pull-out of the lateral row anchor in the suture bridge repair occurred. In comparison to a conventional medial anchor, further biomechanical evaluation of the pull-out force, design, and insertion angle of the lateral anchor is needed in future studies. We report three cases with delayed pull-out of lateral row anchor in suture bridge rotator cuff repair with a literature review.

• Journal of Korean Foot and Ankle Society
• /
• v.16 no.4
• /
• pp.241-246
• /
• 2012

Purpose: The purpose of our study was to perform a comparison of the outcomes of the modified Brostrom procedure using only a suture anchor compared with using a suture anchor with a pushlock anchor. Materials and Methods: This was a retrospective study of chronic lateral ankle instability that underwent a modified Brostrom procedure using a bioabsorbable suture anchor & a pushlock anchor, performed by a single surgeon. A total of 88 patients were enrolled in the study. The function of the patient's ankles were scored using the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS), visual analogue scale (VAS) both preoperatively and postoperatively. Results: The difference in the overall means between the group A and group B was not statistically significant. But, the patient's satisfaction was better in the group B, and there were more complications in the group A. Conclusion: The technique presented here uses the modified Brostrom procedure with pushlock anchors to prevent the problems associated with subcutaneous knot irritation.

• The Academic Congress of Korean Shoulder and Elbow Society
• /
• 2006.03a
• /
• pp.35-35
• /
• 2006

• The Academic Congress of Korean Shoulder and Elbow Society
• /
• 2006.03a
• /
• pp.37-37
• /
• 2006

• The Academic Congress of Korean Shoulder and Elbow Society
• /
• 2006.03a
• /
• pp.31-31
• /
• 2006

• Archives of Plastic Surgery
• /
• v.40 no.6
• /
• pp.773-778
• /
• 2013

Background In the management of mallet deformities, oblique retinacular ligament (ORL) reconstruction provides a mechanism for automatic distal interphalangeal (DIP) joint extension upon active proximal interphalangeal joint extension. The two variants of ORL reconstruction utilize either the lateral band or a free tendon graft. This study aims to compare these two surgical techniques and to assess any differences in functional outcome. As a secondary measure, the Mitek bone anchor and pull-in suture methods are compared. Methods A single-institutional retrospective review of ORL reconstruction was performed. The standard patient demographics, injury mechanism, type of ORL reconstruction, and pre/postoperative degree of extension lag were collected for the 27 cases identified. The cases were divided into lateral band (group A, n=15) and free tendon graft groups (group B, n=12). Group B was subdivided into the pull-in suture technique (B-I) and the Mitek bone anchor method (B-II). Results Overall, ORL reconstructions had improved the mean DIP extension lag by $10^{\circ}$ (P=0.027). Neither the reconstructive technique choice nor bone fixation method identified any statistically meaningful difference in functional outcome (P=0.51 and P=0.83, respectively). Soft-tissue injury was associated with $30.8^{\circ}$ of improvement in the extension lag. The most common complications were tendon adhesion and rupture. Conclusions The choice of the ORL reconstructive technique or the bone anchor method did not influence the primary functional outcome of extension lag in this study. Both lateral band and free tendon graft ORL reconstructions are valid treatment methods in the management of chronic mallet deformity.

• Journal of Korean Foot and Ankle Society
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.72-78
• /
• 2011

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical outcome of excision versus osteosynthesis of type II accessory navicular performed by a single surgeon. Materials and Methods: Cases of 14 feet treated with excision and 13 feet by osteosynthesis for type II accessory navicular of 25 patients from 2002 to 2009 were included in this study. Radiological measurements and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot scale was evaluated. Results: AOFAS midfoot scale of both excision and osteosynthesis groups at last follow-up showed improvement from pre-operation. However, there was no statistical difference in AOFAS midfoot scale and subjective satisfaction between the two groups at last follow-up. In detail of AOFAS midfoot scale, pain and footwear requirements showed statistically favorable results for the excision group, while activity limitation and support showed statistically favorable results for the osteosynthesis group. Subjective recovery time returning to daily activities and starting rehabilitation exercise were 14.6 weeks in the excision group and 13.7 weeks in the osteosynthesis group (p=0.025, Mann-Whitney). Suture anchor loosening was observed in one case in the excision group and non-union in two cases in the osteosynthesis group. Conclusion: Both excision and osteosynthesis are favorable surgical methods, but each method has advantages and possible complications such as suture anchor loosening or non-union. Surgeon's preference, patient's chief complaint, specific needs of patient after the operation and consideration of the size of accessory navicular can be a criteria to consider when selecting a surgical method.