Comparative analysis of the efficacy of arthroscopic closed reduction internal fixation and open reduction internal fixation for medial malleolus fractures

Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of arthroscopic closed reduction internal fixation with Open Reduction Internal Fixation (ORIF) for medial malleolus fractures. Method A total of 43 patients with medial malleolus fractures treated at Jinjiang hospital between October 2021 and October 2022 were randomly divided into experimental group and control group.The experimental group(n=23)underwent arthroscopic closed reduction internal fixation,with an average age of(41.90±14.30)years,while the control group(n=20)underwent traditional ORIF,with an average age of(37.91±14.16)years.Both groups were followed up for 12 to 18 months.Hospital stay duration, operation time and the ankle-hindfoot scores by American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) at the final follow-up were compared between the two groups. Results The experimental group had a significantly shorter hospital stay (9.10±2.17 days) compared to the control group (13.13±6.96 days), and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The control group had a shorter operation time (67.20±37.72 minutes) than the experimental group (100.05±24.45 minutes), with a statistically significant difference (P<0.05).In terms of the AOFAS scores at the final follow-up, the difference between the experimental group and the control group was statistically significant (P<0.001). Conclusion Compared with ORIF, arthroscopic closed reduction internal fixation for medial malleolus fractures can shorten the hospital stay and improve postoperative ankle joint function.