@article{ref1,
title="Return to sport following Lisfranc injuries: a systematic review and meta-analysis",
journal="Foot and ankle surgery",
year="2018",
author="Robertson, Gregory Aidan James and Ang, Kok Kiong and Maffulli, Nicola and Keenan, Gary and Wood, Alexander MacDonald",
volume="ePub",
number="ePub",
pages="ePub-ePub",
abstract="BACKGROUND: Information regarding return rates (RR) and mean return times (RT) to sport following Lisfranc injuries remains limited. <br><br>METHODS: A systematic search of nine major databases was performed to identify all studies which recorded RR or RT to sport following lisfranc injuries. <br><br>RESULTS: Seventeen studies were included (n=366). For undisplaced (Stage 1) injuries managed nonoperatively (n=35), RR was 100% and RT was 4.0 (0-15) wks. For stable minimally-displaced (Stage 2) injuries managed nonoperatively (n=16), RR was 100% and RT was 9.1 (4-14) wks. For the operatively-managed injuries, Percutaneous Reduction Internal Fixation (PRIF) (n=42), showed significantly better RR and RT compared to both: Open Reduction Internal Fixation (ORIF) (n=139) (RR - 98% vs 78%, p<0.019; RT - 11.6 wks vs 19.6 wks, p<0.001); and Primary Partial Arthrodesis (PPA) (n=85) (RR - 98% vs 85%, p<0.047; RT - 11.6 wks vs 22.0 wks, p<0.002). <br><br>CONCLUSIONS: Stage 1 and stable Stage 2 Lisfranc injuries show good results with nonoperative management. PRIF offers the best RR and RT from the operative methods, though this may not be possible with high-energy injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV. Systematic Review of Level I to Level IV Studies.<br><br>Copyright © 2018 European Foot and Ankle Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="1268-7731",
doi="10.1016/j.fas.2018.07.008",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fas.2018.07.008"
}