Classification of Ankle Injury Observed With X-ray Combined With Magnetic Resonance Imaging

History and current related studies Intraarticular fractures and ruptures of ligaments around the joint often occur after ankle injury. Early correct treatment can effectively help joint repair, and reduce the incidence of serious complications. Ankle fractures are one of the common orthopedic fractures. X-ray is a common method for detecting ankle injury, can determine the fracture site, type and extent. However, X-ray is difficult to display ankle fracture, bone fragments, displacement, or ligament injury, so it cannot make accurate fracture classification or formulate treatment programs.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can clearly show the ankle ligament, tendon, and cartilage injury, is advantageous in the diagnosis of ligament injury after ankle fracture, and can provide accurate imaging information. MRI can provide accurate preoperative assessment of clinical indicators for the rational formulation of treatment programs to reduce complications. The observation of ankle contusion observed by MRI is conducive to analyzing the mechanism of ankle joint injury.

Therefore, X-ray combined with MRI would perfectly verify soft tissue injury after ankle fractures so as to make effective surgical program.

Adverse events Adverse events including incision pain, incision nonunion, ankle pain, peripheral nerve injury of ankle joint, ankle joint inflammation, and soft tissue injury. Severe adverse events are events occurred during clinical trial, including requiring hospitalization, prolonged hospitalization, disability, inability to work, life-threatening, or fatalities. If severe adverse events occur, investigators would report details, including the date of occurrence and measures taken to treat the adverse events, to the principle investigator and the institutional review board within 24 hours.

Data collection, management, analysis and open-access

1. Case report forms with demographic data, disease diagnosis, accompanying diseases, drug allergy history, and adverse events were collected.
2. Data were processed using Epidata software (Epidata Association, Odense, Denmark), collated, and then recorded electronically. All data regarding this trial were preserved by the First Hospital, Hebei Medical University, China.
3. The electronic database was statistically analyzed by a professional statistician who created an outcome analysis report that was submitted to the lead researchers.