ArticleClinics in orthopedic surgery2026
Outcomes of Revision Modified Broström Procedure with Periosteal Flap Augmentation in Patients with Recurrent Chronic Ankle Instability.
Article in Clinics in orthopedic surgery, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Although the modified Broström procedure (MBP) is widely accepted as the standard surgical treatment for chronic ankle instability (CAI), recurrent instability remains a clinical challenge, particularly in patients with poor tissue quality or high functional demands. To overcome these limitations, periosteal flap augmentation has been proposed as a biological alternative for patients with recurrent CAI after failed MBP. This study evaluated the clinical and radiographic outcomes of revision MBP with periosteal flap augmentation. Methods: Fourteen patients (mean age, 29.5 years; range, 18-45 years) who underwent revision MBP combined with periosteal flap augmentation between 2018 and 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. The mean follow-up duration was 23.7 months (18-32 months). Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS), American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, and Karlsson-Peterson score. Radiographic evaluation included talar tilt angle and anterior talar displacement. Results: At a mean follow-up of 23.7 months (18-32 months), all clinical scores improved significantly (VAS: 5.9 to 1.6; AOFAS: 64.1 to 90.6; Karlsson-Peterson: 50.7 to 90.0; Conclusions: Revision MBP with periosteal flap augmentation showed favorable short-term clinical and radiographic outcomes in patients with recurrent CAI after failed MBP. This technique may serve as a useful autologous reinforcement option in selected revision cases.
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.