ABSTRACT
Introduction Although there are several imaging options for diagnosing syndesmotic injury, a fundamental question that guides treatment remains unanswered. Syndesmotic instability is still challenging to correctly diagnose, and syndesmotic disruption and true syndesmotic instability should be differentiated. Currently, imaging tests quickly diagnose the severe syndesmotic instability but have difficulty in diagnosing mild and moderate cases. This study aims to investigate which strategy among an existing computed tomography (CT) index test and two new add-on CT index tests with stress manoeuvres can more accurately diagnose syndesmotic instability. The secondary objective is to investigate the participants’ disability outcomes by applying the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure questionnaire.
Methods and analyses This diagnostic accuracy-test study will consecutively select individuals older than 18 years with a clinical diagnosis of suspected acute syndesmotic injury. Three strategies of the CT index test (one in the neutral position and two with stress) will examine the accuracy using magnetic resonance imaging as the reference standard. The external rotation and dorsiflexion of the ankle will guide the stress manoeuvres. Comparison measurements between the injured syndesmosis and the uninjured contralateral side of the same individual will investigate syndesmotic instability, evaluating the rotational and translational relationship between the fibula and tibia. Sensitivity, specificity, area under the ROC curve and likelihoods will compare the diagnostic accuracies of the strategies.
Ethics and dissemination The Internal Review Board and the Research Ethics Committee approved this study (registered number 62100016.5.0000.0071). All the participants will receive a spoken description of the aim of the study, and the choice to participate will be free and voluntary. Participants’ enrolment will occur after signing the written informed consent, including the terms of confidentiality. The results will be presented at national and international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals and social media.
Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier NCT04095598), pre-results.
Strengths and limitations of this study
This study is the first to examine the accuracy and feasibility of CT with stress manoeuvres for diagnosing syndesmotic instability.
The disability outcomes will be used to evaluate syndesmotic instability diagnosed by CT with stress manoeuvres as a prognostic factor.
The limitations of this study include the use of MRI as the reference standard test, which, although not perfect, is estimated to have high accuracy compared to the gold-standard arthroscopy.1
An inherent degree of imprecision related to the severity of the ankle sprain and pain exacerbation may occur when the participants themselves control stress manoeuvres; therefore, some variability is unavoidable. Researchers will monitor and investigate the influence of this source of variability on the results.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
NCT04095598 pre-results
Funding Statement
No external funding was received.
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
alexandre.godoy{at}einstein.br
marcelo.prado{at}einstein.br
jose.alloza{at}einstein.br
renato.masagao{at}einstein.br
laercio.rosemberg{at}einstein.br
durval.santos{at}einstein.br
Adham.amaral{at}einstein.br
demange{at}usp.br
mario.lenza{at}einstein.br
Mario.Ferretti{at}einstein.br
Albert Einstein Hospital, Albert Einstein Avenue, 627/701, São Paulo – SP, 05652-900, Brazil, 55 11 2151-2452 or 55 11 2151-4586
Disclosures: The corresponding author and coauthors have no relevant disclosures.
IRB: The internal review board and the research ethics committee (register number 62100016.5.0000.0071) approved this study, and all participants provided written informed consent.
Data Availability
The actual publication is a study protocol with no data to present. In a forthcoming paper with the results, researchers intend to share data.