ArticleInternational orthopaedics2026
Novel dynamic syndesmotic stabilization system improves anteroposterior and axial translation in distal tibiofibular joint.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe quest for optimal treatment of acute distal tibiofibular syndesmotic disruptions is still in full progress. Using suture-button repair devices is one of the dynamic stabilization options, however, they may not be always appropriate for stabilization, for example in length-unstable syndesmotic injuries. The aim of this biomechanical study was to investigate whether a novel screw-suture implant addresses such issues compared to suture-button implants while preserving dynamic capabilities.
methodsEight pairs of human cadaveric lower legs were injured by complete syndesmosis and deltoid ligaments cuts, and reconstructed using a screw-suture (FIBULINK, Group 1) or a suture-button (TightRope, Group 2) implant for syndesmotic stabilization, placed 20 mm proximal to the tibia plafond. Following, all specimens were biomechanically tested over 5000 cycles under combined 1400 N axial and ± 15° torsional loading. Anteroposterior, axial/vertical, mediolateral and torsional movements at the distal tibiofibular joint level were evaluated biomechanically via optical motion tracking.
resultsAnteroposterior and axial/vertical movements were significantly smaller and maintained over the cycles in Group 1 compared with Group 2 (p < 0.001). No further significant differences were identified between the groups (p ≥ 0.318).
conclusionAlthough both implant systems demonstrate ability for stabilization of unstable syndesmotic injuries, the screw-suture reconstruction provides better anteroposterior and axial/vertical stability of the distal tibiofibular joint, and maintains it over time under dynamic loading in a cadaveric study design. Therefore, it could be considered as a valid option for treatment of syndesmotic disruptions with length-unstable fibula. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/ STUDY
designLevel V, Controlled Laboratory Study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.