Research Article

Diabetic Ankle Fractures: A Review of the Literature and an Introduction to the Adelaide Fracture in the Diabetic Ankle Algorithm and Score

Table 2

Critical analysis of the notable publications.

Study typeAuthors, year, and location originPrognostic
evidence strength
Patient detailsRelevant findings

Cohort studyGuo et al. [20]
China, 2009
Level II(i) Retrospectively selected 72 patients (36 preoperatively neglected diabetes, 36 nondiabetic controls) with closed ankle fractures between 01/03 and 09/07 
(ii) Recall of patients for prospective review over 12 months 
(iii) Managed either nonoperatively and operatively 
(iv) Mean age 54.4
(i) Increased incidence of infection, nonunion, and Charcot’s arthropathy 
(ii) No significant difference in AOFAS and Bray’s ankle score between two groups

Retrospective studySooHoo et al. [21]
USA, 2009
Level II57,183 operatively managed ankle fractures (1,219 were complicated diabetic ankle fractures)Significant increase in complication rates (wound infection, revision operation, and BKA) in complicated diabetic group
Ganesh et al. [3]
USA, 2005
Level II160,598 nationwide ankle fractures (9174 diabetic ankle fractures) between 1988 and 2000Diabetics had significant increase in in-hospital mortality, complications, length of stay, and cost

Case control McCormack and Leith [22]
Canada, 1998
Level III(i) 52 patients (26 diabetic, 26 control) with closed ankle fractures between 04/90 and 01/99 
(ii) Mean age 61 (43–78)
Significant increase in complications in both nonoperative and operative fixation in diabetics
Jones et al. [23]
USA, 2005
Level III(i) 84 patients (42 diabetic, 42 control)  
(ii) Mean age 57.1
Significant increase in long-term bracing in diabetics (mean age 53.6, insulin dependant, mean duration of DM 20.3 years, and history of Charcot’s)
Flynn et al. [24]
Puerto Rico, 2000
Level III(i) 98 patients with closed ankle fractures (25 diabetic, 73 nondiabetic) between 01/88 and 31/97 
(ii) Mean age 44 (nondiabetic) and 60 (diabetic)
Significant increase in postoperative infection in diabetic group (up to five times), especially with factors: nonoperative management, poor glycaemic control, and neuropathy
Blotter et al. [25]
USA, 1999
Level III(i) 67 surgically treated ankle fractures in patients (21 diabetic, 46 nondiabetic/control) between 03/85 and 10/96 
(ii) 4/21 Webber C, 17/21 Webber B 
(iii) Mean age 55 (diabetic group) and 53 (nondiabetic/control group)
(i) Significant increase in postoperative complication in diabetic group (43% versus 15%), particularly in the insulin dependent 
(ii) 2 cases of postoperative Charcot’s arthropathy in diabetic population 
(iii) No diabetic subgroup analysis
Kristiansen [26]
Denmark, 1983
Level III30 patients (10 diabetic, 20 nondiabetic/control)Significantly increase in wound infection (60% versus 10%) and hospitalization in diabetics (17 versus 9 days)
Bibbo et al. [27]
USA, 2001
Level III(i) 59 patients with isolated ankle fractures (13 diabetic, 46 nondiabetic/control)  
(ii) Mean age 55.1 (diabetic), 40.2 (nondiabetic/control)  
(iii) Mean followup 46 months (diabetic) and 32 months (nondiabetic/control)
(i) Increased complication rate in diabetics compared to nondiabetics (46% versus 17%) 
(ii) None required amputation/arthrodesis 
(iii) No information on presence of diabetic complications

Case seriesCostigan et al. [28]
USA, 2007
Level IV(i) 84 diabetic patients with previous ORIF of an ankle fracture over an 8-year period 
(ii) Mean age 49.5 
(iii) Average followup 4.1 years
Significant increase in complications in diabetics with peripheral neuropathy and peripheral vascular disease
Ayoub [14]
Egypt, 2008
Level IV(i) 17 patients with Charcot arthropathy undergoing tibiotalar arthrodesis 
(ii) Mean age 61.6 (57–69)  
(iii) Mean followup 26 months
Fusion rates were higher in patients with O2 saturations > 95%, decreased BMI, absence of peripheral neuropathy
Holmes and Hill [29]
USA, 1994
Level IV(i) Assesses relationship of early diagnosis and treatment in 18 patients with diabetic ankle or foot fracture/dislocations between 05/85 and 05/90 
(ii) Mean age 55 
(iii) Mean followup 27 months
11/20 had a delay in diagnosis with average time of 1 month between onset of symptoms and diagnosis
Kline et al. [30]
USA, 2009
Level IV(i) 83 tibial pilon fractures (14 diabetic, 68 nondiabetic) between 01/2005 and 06/2007 
(ii) Mean age 47.3 
(iii) Length of followup 14.5 months (diabetic) and 12.3 months (nondiabetic)
Significant increase in postoperative complications including infection (71% versus 19%) and nonunion/delayed union (43% versus 16%)
White et al. [31]
USA, 2003
Level IV(i) 14 open ankle fractures in 13 patients with diabetes between 01/01/1981 and 31/12/2000 
(ii) Mean age 54 (29–80)  
(iii) Mean followup 19 months 
(iv) 9/13 patients were insulin dependent
9/14 developed wound complications, 6/14 had below knee amputations (4 of these were at least Gustilo Class III open fractures), and 3/14 healed
Schon et al. [32]
USA, 1998
Level IV28 diabetic neuropathic ankle fractures (15 undisplaced, 13 displaced)(i) Undisplaced ankle fractures are amenable to nonoperative management without significant complications 
(ii) Of the 13 displaced ankle fractures, high risk of malunion/nonunion if standard ORIF is used
Low and Tan [33]
Singapore, 1995
Level IV (i) 93 surgically treated ankle fractures (83 nondiabetic, 10 diabetic) between 01/1992 and 06/1993 
(ii) Mean age 67.5 
(iii) Mean followup 16.2 months
(i) 5 reported cases of infection (all diabetics)  
(ii) 2/5 requiring below knee amputation, with at least 1/5 having a history of peripheral neuropathy