Does Syndesmotic Injury Have a Negative Effect on Functional Outcome? A Multicenter Prospective Evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of syndesmotic disruption on the functional outcomes of Weber B, SE4 ankle fractures treated operatively. SETTING: Multicenter trauma hospitals. PATIENTS: Data were prospectively gathered during a previous, multicenter randomized trial including 242 patients (136 women, 106 men) from 9 trauma centers with operatively treated Weber B SE4 ankle fractures. There were 81 patients (35%) with syndesmotic instability confirmed intraoperatively after fibula fixation. INTERVENTION: Functional evaluations were performed postoperatively at 6, 12, 26, and 52 weeks. The presence of symptomatic hardware and peroneal tendon discomfort was evaluated with 9-12 months of follow-up. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Functional outcomes evaluated included Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA), Bother index, and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) scores. The recovery curve of the 2 groups was analyzed using a mixed linear regression analysis for repeated measures and included gender and race in the model. Symptomatic hardware and peroneal tendon discomfort were compared between the 2 groups with a χ analysis. RESULTS: The adjusted mean linear regression analyses demonstrated that patients without a syndesmotic injury had better functional outcomes for some outcome measures. SMFA scores at 12 weeks were statistically lower in patients without syndesmotic injury (P = 0.02), but not at other visits. AOFAS scores were significantly higher (P = 0.0006), and Bother index trended toward lower results (P = 0.07) in patients without syndesmotic injury at all time points. Isolated analyses (T-tests) at 1 year demonstrated a difference in the SMFA (P = 0.04) and Bother index (P = 0.05), but not the AOFAS (P = 0.21). Men consistently demonstrated better recovery than women for all outcomes, whereas race was not significant for any measure. Symptomatic hardware and peroneal tendon irritation was not statistically different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The recovery curves after ankle fractures were different based on syndesmotic injury. However, the difference was at the limit of clinical significance. Syndesmotic injury has a slightly detrimental effect on outcomes of operatively treated Weber B SE4 fractures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".