Background: To determine the safety and efficacy of using ultrasound in topographic marking of the neurovascular structures and tendons in the foot and ankle and identification of a safe zone for arthroscopic portal creation, compared to using anatomical landmarks.
Materials and methods: Twelve cadaveric samples were randomly divided into two groups of six. The first group underwent ultrasound assessment by a board-certified radiologist, who identified zones of safety for ultrasound-guided insertion of anteromedial, anterolateral, and posteromedial arthroscopic portals. Ankle arthroscopy was then performed. The other group underwent similar ankle arthroscopy assessment utilizing conventional anatomical landmarks. Straws were used to delineate arthroscopy portal tracts. The cadaveric samples were then dissected. The following distances were measured between the portals and important anatomical structures—the anterolateral portal and superficial peroneal nerve (SPN) as well as extensor digitorum longus (EDL); anteromedial portal and the great saphenous vein (GSV) as well as tibialis anterior (TA); and the posteromedial portal and the flexor hallucis longus (FHL).
Results: No neurovascular structures or tendons were injured in all 12 cadaveric samples. Compared with the nonultrasonography group, the group that underwent ultrasonography assessment had statistically significant larger distance of the SPN, EDL, and TA from the anterolateral and anteromedial arthroscopic portals (p-values = 0.045, 0.046, and 0.025, respectively). No difference was found between the distance of the GSV from the anteromedial arthroscopic portal as well as the distance of the FHL from the posteromedial arthroscopic portal.
Conclusion: Ultrasound assessment and topographic identification of the safe zone for ankle arthroscopic portal creation are a safe and effective processes that may reduce the risk of iatrogenic injury to neurovascular structures and tendons in anterior and posterior ankle arthroscopy.
Level of evidence: IV; cadaveric study.
Dhillon MS, Hooda A, Kumar P. History of foot and ankle arthroscopy. J Arthrosc Surg Sports Med 2020;1(1):126–132. DOI: 10.25259/JASSM_4_2020
van Dijk CN, van Bergen CJ. Advancements in Ankle Arthroscopy. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2008;16(11):635–646. DOI: 10.5435/00124635-200811000-00004
Vega J, Dalmau-Pastor M, Malagelada F, et al. Ankle arthroscopy: an update. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2017;99(16):1395–1407. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.16.00046
Zekry M, Shahban SA, El Gamal T, et al. A literature review of the complications following anterior and posterior ankle arthroscopy. Foot Ankle Surg 2019;25(5):553–558. DOI: 10.1016/j.fas.2018.06.007
Deng DF, Hamilton GA, Lee M, et al. Complications associated with foot and ankle arthroscopy. J Foot Ankle Surg 2012;51(3):281–284. DOI: 10.1053/j.jfas.2011.11.011
Zengerink M, van Dijk CN. Complications in ankle arthroscopy. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2012;20(8):1420–1431. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-012-2063-x
Epstein DM, Black BS, Sherman SL. Anterior ankle arthroscopy: indications, pitfalls, and complications. Foot Ankle Clin 2015;20(1):41–57. DOI: 10.1016/j.fcl.2014.10.001
van Dijk CN, Scholten PE, Krips R. A 2-portal endoscopic approach for diagnosis and treatment of posterior ankle pathology. Arthroscopy 2000;16(8):871–876. DOI: 10.1053/jars.2000.19430
Ferkel RD, Small HN, Gittins JE. Complications in foot and ankle arthroscopy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001;(391):89–104. DOI: 10.1097/00003086-200110000-00010
Yammine K, Assi C. Neurovascular and tendon injuries due to ankle arthroscopy portals: a meta-analysis of interventional cadaveric studies. Surg Radiol Anat 2018;40(5):489–497. DOI: 10.1007/s00276-018-2013-5
Saito A, Kikuchi S. Anatomic relations between ankle arthroscopic portal sites and the superficial peroneal and saphenous nerves. Foot Ankle Int 1998;19(11):748–752. DOI: 10.1177/107110079801901107
Woo SB, Wong TM, Chan WL, et al. Anatomic variations of neurovascular structures of the ankle in relation to arthroscopic portals: a cadaveric study of Chinese subjects. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2010;18(1):71–75. DOI: 10.1177/230949901001800116
Oliva XM, Méndez López JM, Monzo Planella M, et al. Anatomical relations of anterior and posterior ankle arthroscopy portals: a cadaveric study. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2015;25(3):577–581. DOI: 10.1007/s00590-014-1559-0
Sitler DF, Amendola A, Bailey CS, et al. Posterior ankle arthroscopy: an anatomic study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2002;84(5):763–769. DOI: 10.2106/00004623-200205000-00010
Heck J, Mendicino RW, Stasko P, et al. An anatomic safe zone for posterior ankle arthroscopy: a cadaver study. J Foot Ankle Surg 2012;51(6):753–756. DOI: 10.1053/j.jfas.2012.08.007
Poggio D, Claret G, López AM, et al. Correlation between visual inspection and ultrasonography to identify the distal branches of the superficial peroneal nerve: a cadaveric study. J Foot Ankle Surg 2016;55(3):492–495. DOI: 10.1053/j.jfas.2016.01.014
Scheibling B, Koch G, Clavert P. Cadaver study of anatomic landmark identification for placing ankle arthroscopy portals. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2017;103(3):387–391. DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2016.09.026
Mercer D, Morrell NT, Fitzpatrick J, et al. The course of the distal saphenous nerve: a cadaveric investigation and clinical implications. Iowa Orthop J 2011;31:231–235.
Dalmau-Pastor M, Vega J. Ankle arthroscopy: no-distraction and dorsiflexion allows advanced techniques. Arthroscopy 2019;35(12):3171–3172. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2019.10.013
Tonogai I, Hayashi F, Tsuruo Y, et al. Anatomic study of anterior and posterior ankle portal sites for ankle arthroscopy in plantarflexion and dorsiflexion: a cadaveric study in the Japanese population. J Foot Ankle Surg 2018;57(3):537–542. DOI: 10.1053/j.jfas.2017.11.029
