ReviewInternational orthopaedics2025
The tibiofibular mortise - anatomical controversies and their clinical importance: a historical and pictorial essay.
Review in International orthopaedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Injuries of the tibiofibular syndesmosis].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Article
- Anatomy and metrics of the medial malleolus.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionDuring 280 years of studies of the anatomy of the distal tibiofibular articulation, there have arisen many unclear issues regarding the description of individual structures and their terminology. These historical inaccuracies were subsequently reflected in the clinical practice. MATERIALS AND
methodsA literature search of original publications and historical sources was performed.
resultsThe distal tibiofibular articulation is a synovial joint, rather than a syndesmosis, as it is an integral part of the ankle joint. The interosseous tibiofibular ligament (ITFL), described for the first time by a French anatomist Bichat in 1801, is the strongest ligament of the tibiofibular mortise. Unfortunately, this clinically important ligament is not recognized by the current international anatomical nomenclature. The terms anterior inferior (AITFL) and posterior inferior tibiofibular ligaments (PITFL) are historical remnants "reimported" from the American/British literature and should not be used, because the analogous superior ligaments do not exist. The intermalleolar ligament, first described by Weitbrecht in 1742, is a variable, but constant, structure reinforcing the posterior capsule of the ankle joint. The term inferior transverse ligament (IFT) denoting in the English literature the inferior part of the posterior tibiofibular ligament was originally used for the intermalleolar ligament. The IFT ligament is a part of the posterior tibiofibular ligament and there is no reason to stress its importance.
conclusionThe chaos in the anatomy, terminology and depiction of the articulation of the distal tibia and fibula, unparalleled in any other joint of the human body, is the result of historical development. A certain negative role was, in this respect, played also by Basiliensia Nomina Anatomica (1895), that eradicated ITFL and called the distal tibiofibular joint a syndesmosis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39747470What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.