No Difference between Percutaneous and Arthroscopic Techniques in Identifying the Calcaneal Insertion during Ankle Lateral Ligament Reconstruction: A Cadaveric Study

Background. Both percutaneous and arthroscopic techniques have been introduced in anatomic ankle lateral ligaments reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to compare these two techniques in identifying the calcaneal insertion of the calcaneofibular ligament (CFL). Methods. Fifteen fresh-frozen human ankle cadaver specimens were used in this study. Each specimen was tested in three stages. For stage 1, each specimen was evaluated under arthroscopy. After debridement was performed, the insertion of the CFL on the calcaneus was identified, and a 1.5mm Kirschner wire was drilled at the center of the insertion. For stage 2, a percutaneous technique was used to identify the center of the insertion of the CFL. A second 1.5 mm Kirschner wire was drilled through the skin marker. For stage 3, the ankle was dissected, the footprint of the CFL was identified under direct vision, and the distances between the center of the CFL insertion on the calcaneus and the two Kirschner wires were measured, respectively. Results. In the arthroscopic technique group, the mean distance from the Kirschner wire to the center of the CFL insertion in the calcaneus was 3.4 ± 1.3 mm. In the percutaneous technique group, the mean distance from the Kirschner wire to the center of the CFL insertion was 3.2 ± 1.4 mm. No significant difference was found between the two groups. Conclusion. No difference in identifying the calcaneal insertion of the CFL was found between the percutaneous and the arthroscopic ankle lateral ligaments reconstruction technique. Both techniques can be used during anatomic ligaments reconstruction in treatment of chronic ankle instability.