Lisfranc injuries with dislocation the first tarsometatarsal joint: primary arthrodesis or internal fixation (a randomized controlled trial)

Background Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) is a popular method for treatment of displaced Lisfranc injuries. However, even with anatomic reduction and solid internal fixation, treatment does not provide good outcomes in certain severe dislocations. The purpose of this study was to compare ORIF and primary arthrodesis (PA) of the first tarsometatarsal (TMT) joint for Lisfranc injuries with the first TMT joint dislocation. Methods Seventy-eight Lisfranc injuries with first TMT joint dislocation were finally enrolled and analyzed in a prospective, randomized trial comparing ORIF and PA. They were 50 males and females with a mean age of 40.7 years and randomized to ORIF group and PA group. Outcome measures included radiographs, American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot scale, Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) Sports subscale, visual analog scale (VAS), and the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). Complications and revision rate were also analyzed. Results Forty patients were treated by ORIF, while PA group includes 38 cases. Patients were followed up for 37.8(range, 24–48) months. At final follow-up, the mean AOFAS midfoot score ( P < 0.01), the FAAM Sports subscale ( P < 0.01), the physical function score ( P < 0.05), and the Bodily Pain score of SF-36 ( P < 0.05) after ORIF treatment were significantly lower than PA group. The mean VAS score in ORIF group was higher ( P < 0.01). In ORIF group, redislocation of the first TMT joint was observed in ten cases, and thirteen patients had pain in midfoot. No redislocation and no hardware failure were identified in PA group. Conclusion PA of the first TMT joint provided a better medium-term outcome than ORIF for Lisfranc injuries with the first TMT dislocation. Possible complications and revision could be avoided by PA for dislocated first ray injuries.