Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Chronic lateral ankle instability (CLAI), frequently resulting from ankle sprains, is often associated with undiagnosed hindfoot varus deformities, specifically subtle cavus foot (SCF). While ligament reconstruction remains the standard treatment for CLAI with SCF, there is ongoing debate regarding the need for adjunctive calcaneal osteotomy to correct the underlying malalignment. Our study aims to evaluate the clinical efficacy and necessity of minimally invasive calcaneal osteotomy combined with arthroscopic modified Broström procedure in patients with CLAI with SCF. Materials and methods A retrospective analysis of 102 patients with CLAI and SCF was conducted from November 2016 to November 2022. Patients undergoing arthroscopic modified Broström procedure were assigned to the control group, while those receiving arthroscopic modified Broström procedure with minimally invasive calcaneal osteotomy were placed in the experimental group. General data and complications were documented. Preoperative and postoperative imaging included calcaneal pitch angle, Meary’s angle, arch height, and calcaneus valgus angle. Clinical outcomes were measured using the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Score and visual analogue scale (VAS). Results A total of 81 patients with 2-year follow-up were included, with 46 in the experimental group and 35 in the control group. Significant differences in imaging indicators were observed in the experimental group at all follow-up points ( P < 0.001), while no significant changes were noted in the control group ( P > 0.05). Both groups demonstrated improvements in AOFAS and VAS scores ( P < 0.001), with differences between 3- and 24-month follow-up ( P < 0.001). Significant differences in imaging indicators and AOFAS scores were found between groups at both follow-up intervals ( P < 0.01). The complication rate was 6.52% in the experimental group and 11.43% in the control group. Conclusions For patients with CLAI with SCF, arthroscopic modified Broström procedure with minimally invasive calcaneal osteotomy is an effective treatment that minimizes bone and soft tissue damage. Our study suggests that it is necessary to correct hindfoot alignment while stabilizing the ankle joint to enhance function and reduce recurrence of chronic ankle instability. Level of evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study

Arch height is one important aspect of foot posture. An estimated 20% of the population has pes planus and 20% has pes cavus. These abnormal foot postures can alter lower extremity kinematics and plantar loading and contribute to injury risk. Ankle bracing is commonly used in sport to prevent these injuries, but no researchers have examined the effects of ankle bracing on plantar loading. To evaluate the effects of ankle braces on plantar loading during athletic tasks. Cross-sectional study. Laboratory. A total of 36 participants (11 men, 25 women; age = 23.1 ± 2.5 years, height = 1.72 ± 0.09 m, mass = 66.3 ± 14.7 kg) were recruited for this study. Participants completed walking, running, and cutting tasks in 3 bracing conditions: no brace, lace-up ankle-support brace, and semirigid brace. We analyzed the plantar-loading variables of contact area, maximum force, and force-time integral for 2 midfoot and 3 forefoot regions and assessed the displacement of the center of pressure. A 3 × 3 mixed-model repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to determine the effects of brace and foot type (α = .05). Foot type affected force measures in the middle (P range = .003-.047) and the medial side of the foot (P range = .004-.04) in all tasks. Brace type affected contact area in the medial midfoot during walking (P = .005) and cutting (P = .01) tasks, maximum force in the medial and lateral midfoot during all tasks (P < .001), and force-time integral in the medial midfoot during all tasks (P < .001). Portions of the center-of-pressure displacement were affected by brace wear in both the medial-lateral and anterior-posterior directions (P range = .001-.049). Ankle braces can be worn to redistribute plantar loading. Additional research should be done to evaluate their effectiveness in injury prevention.

Background Lisfranc (tarsometatarsal joint) injuries are relatively rare, accounting for less than 1% of all fractures, and as many as 20% of subtle Lisfranc injuries are missed at the initial patient presentation. An undiagnosed Lisfranc injury can have devastating consequences to the patient. Therefore, any factor that can raise a clinician’s index of suspicion to make this diagnosis is potentially important. The cavus foot has been associated with various maladies of the lower extremity, but to our knowledge, it has not been reported to be associated with Lisfranc injury. Questions/purposes Do patients who experience a low-energy Lisfranc injury have greater talar head coverage and a greater talo-first metatarsal angle than control subjects? Methods A retrospective, case-control study was conducted from September 2011 to December 2014 to identify patients diagnosed and treated for a low-energy Lisfranc injury. Twenty-three adult patients with an average age of 42.6 years (SD, 16.3 years) were identified and compared with 61 adult control subjects with an average age of 49.4 years (SD, 14.1 years). Control subjects came from the practice of a fellowship-trained foot and ankle orthopaedic surgeon. Control subjects underwent a history and physical, clinical examination, and diagnostic imaging to confirm that they had no prior foot disorder, no prior foot surgeries, were within 3 years of age of a patient with a Lisfranc injury, and were independent ambulators. Two authors (DSD and JDP) measured the talonavicular and talo-first metatarsal angles on weightbearing AP and lateral radiographs of the foot. The intrarater reliability and interrater reliability for the talo-first metatarsal angle and the talonavicular angle showed high agreement. The intrarater intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) of the talo-first metatarsal angle were 0.94 (95% CI, 0.91–0.96) and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.9–0.96). For the talonavicular angle the ICCs were 0.83 (95% CI, 0.75–0.89) and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.81–0.92) for Raters 1 and 2 respectively. The interrater ICCs were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.69–0.96) for the talo-first metatarsal angle and 0.9 (95% CI, 0.85–0.94) for the talonavicular angle. The patients and controls were compared to determine if the patients who sustained a Lisfranc injury were more likely to have a pes cavus foot alignment. We performed a mixed modeling analysis to control for potential cofounding variables and determine if there was an association of Lisfranc injury with the talo-first metatarsal angle and the talonavicular angle. Results After controlling for confounding variables such as the effect of the measurement round effect and the effect of the rater, our repeated measures analysis via mixed model showed patients were associated with a higher talo-first metatarsal angle than control subjects (adjusted least square mean for patients = 3.05; for controls = −2.65; mean difference, 5.7; p = 0.001). Repeated measures analysis via mixed model showed that patients also were associated with a more positive talonavicular angle than control subjects (adjusted least square mean for patients = −4.83, for controls = −11; mean difference, 6.17; p = 0.002). Patients with Lisfranc injuries had a higher mean talo-first metatarsal angle than did control subjects (1.9° ± 7.9° versus −2.2° ± 7.3°; mean difference, 4.1°; 95% CI, −7.7° to −0.5°; p = 0.028), and less talar uncovering (−4.2° ± 9.7° versus −11° ± 8°; mean difference, 6.7°; 95% CI, −6.7° to −10.8°; p = 0.001). Conclusions We found that cavus midfoot alignment was more prevalent among patients with Lisfranc injuries than among individuals with no foot injury or disorder. Although this does not suggest that cavus alignment causes or predisposes patients to this injury, we believe the finding is important because this provides a radiographic parameter that clinicians can use to raise their index of suspicion for a Lisfranc injury and aggressively pursue this diagnosis. Future studies would benefit from obtaining contralateral foot imaging at the time of injury in all patients with Lisfranc injury or prospectively following patients with foot imaging and recording the incidence of future foot injury. Level of Evidence Level III, prognostic study.

Background Poststroke cavovarus foot greatly affects patients’ activities of daily life and raises the risks of falls and consequent fractures. Acupuncture appears to be safe and effective in promoting motor functions and enhancing the activities of daily life among patients with poststroke cavovarus foot. The current study aims to study the biomechanical effect of acupuncture for poststroke cavovarus foot with objective outcome measurements. Methods/design This is an assessor and analyst-blinded, randomized, controlled pilot study. A total of 60 eligible patients with poststroke cavovarus foot will be allocated by a 1:1 ratio into an acupuncture treatment group and a control group. Patients in the control group will receive conventional rehabilitation therapies, whereas a combination of acupuncture and conventional rehabilitation therapies will be applied in the acupuncture group. The primary outcome measures are three objective biomechanical parameters from the RSSCAN gait system: varus angle, dynamic plantar pressure distribution, and static plantar contact area. Scores of the Berg Balance Scale, the Fugl-Meyer Assessment, and the Stroke-Specific Quality of Life Scale, as well as other biomechanical parameters such as the step length and width, step time phase, and weight shifting phase will be selected as secondary outcome measurements. All assessments will be conducted at baseline, 4 weeks after the treatment course, and after a follow-up period of 3 months. Discussion Results of the current study will provide detailed interpretations of the biomechanical effect of acupuncture for stroke rehabilitation and foundations for future larger clinical studies. Trial registration Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR-IPC-15006889 (8 August 2015).