A Multicenter Randomized Trial Comparing Antiglide and Lateral Plate Fixation in Ankle Fractures

• Functional Scores: SF12v2, SMFA, AOFAS ankle/hindfoot scale [ Time Frame: Preoperative (or initial hospitalization), 6, 12, 26, and 52 week standard of care visits ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
  

• Comparison of functional scores in a priori subgroup: >60 vs <60 years old. [ Time Frame: Discharge 6, 9, and 12 months post-operation ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
  
• Comparison in functional scores in a priori subgroup: Good bone quality vs poor bone quality [ Time Frame: discharge 6, 9, and 12 months post-operation ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
  
• Comparison of functional scores in a priori subgroup: Those with syndesmotic injury versus those without. [ Time Frame: discharge 6, 9, and 12 months post-operation ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
  

Since it was first described in 1982, posterior antiglide plating has been presented as an attractive alternative to lateral plating of distal fibula fractures. Biomechanical studies have shown it to be a stronger construct than lateral plating, and other purported advantages include less dissection, decreased potential for intra-articular screw placement, and less palpable hardware decreasing the need for hardware removal.However, although posterior plating has become an accepted technique for operative management of these injuries, there is little clinical information in the literature regarding this treatment, and only one published retrospective study directly comparing posterior to lateral plating.

In 1996, Ostrum published a prospective study evaluating posterior plating in 32 patients, but only compared his results to a cohort of patients treated with lateral plating that was not part of his actual study group.Patel et al. recently presented a retrospective comparison of both techniques, but their study only included 29 patients in the lateral plating group and 23 in the posterior group.In both these studies, posterior plating was felt to be superior to lateral plating based on both the decrease in complications/re-operations related to symptomatic hardware, and improved function and pain scores.

However, in a much larger study, Lamontagneet al. showed no differences in operative time, complications or hardware removal rates in 193 patients reviewed retrospectively, and concluded that they could not recommend one treatment method over the other. They even elected not to proceed with a planned prospective study based on their results.A recent retrospective analysis of 70 patients showed a 43% incidence of need for hardware removal due to pain, with 30% of these patients having peroneal tendon lesions identified intra-operatively.