Skip to main content
OrthoVellum
Knowledge Hub

Study

  • Topics
  • MCQs
  • ISAWE
  • Operative Surgery
  • Flashcards

Company

  • About Us
  • Editorial Policy
  • Contact
  • FAQ
  • Blog

Legal

  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Medical Disclaimer
  • Copyright & DMCA
  • Refund Policy

Support

  • Help Center
  • Accessibility
  • Report an Issue
OrthoVellum

© 2026 OrthoVellum. For educational purposes only.

Not affiliated with the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.

Chronic Ankle Instability

Back to Topics
Contents
0%

Chronic Ankle Instability

Comprehensive Orthopaedic exam guide to chronic lateral ankle instability including pathophysiology, assessment, and evidence-based surgical reconstruction

complete
Updated: 2026-01-02
High Yield Overview

CHRONIC ANKLE INSTABILITY

ATFL Primary | CFL Secondary | Mechanical + Functional

20-40%of ankle sprains become chronic
ATFLprimary restraint
85-95%Brostrom success rate
3-6 moreturn to sport

Types of Instability

Mechanical
PatternObjective laxity on exam/stress XR
TreatmentLigament reconstruction
Functional
PatternGiving way, normal exam
TreatmentProprioceptive rehab
Combined
PatternBoth mechanical and functional
TreatmentSurgery + comprehensive rehab

Critical Must-Knows

  • ATFL is weakest and most commonly injured lateral ligament
  • CFL is EXTRA-ARTICULAR - injured with increasing inversion force
  • Anterior drawer tests ATFL; Talar tilt tests CFL
  • Conservative treatment fails in 20-40% of patients
  • Brostrom-Gould is gold standard surgical treatment

Examiner's Pearls

  • "
    ATFL: resists anterolateral translation in plantarflexion
  • "
    CFL: resists inversion throughout ROM (crosses subtalar joint)
  • "
    Functional instability = proprioceptive deficit, peroneal weakness
  • "
    Always exclude subtalar instability and OLT

Clinical Imaging

Imaging Gallery

Anatomical model of the right ankle joint. The course of the anterior talofibular ligament (arrows)
Click to expand
Anatomical model of the right ankle joint. The course of the anterior talofibular ligament (arrows)Credit: Szczepaniak J et al. via J Ultrason via Open-i (NIH) (Open Access (CC BY))

Critical Chronic Ankle Instability Exam Points

Anatomy is Key

ATFL (anterior talofibular): weakest lateral ligament, taut in plantarflexion, resists anterior translation. CFL (calcaneofibular): extra-articular, taut in dorsiflexion, crosses subtalar joint. PTFL: rarely injured, strongest lateral ligament.

Distinguish Instability Types

Mechanical instability = true laxity (positive anterior drawer greater than 10mm, talar tilt greater than 10 degrees). Functional instability = giving way without laxity (proprioceptive deficit, peroneal weakness). Both types can coexist.

Examination

Anterior drawer (ATFL): 90 degrees knee flexion, ankle neutral, translate talus anteriorly. Talar tilt (CFL): invert hindfoot, compare to contralateral. Compare side-to-side - absolute values less reliable.

Surgical Decision

Brostrom-Gould = anatomic repair + IER reinforcement (first line). Non-anatomic reconstruction (tenodesis) for revision, generalized laxity, or poor tissue. Graft reconstruction increasingly popular.

Quick Decision Guide

PresentationExaminationImagingManagement
Giving way, no objective laxityNormal drawer/tilt, weak peronealsXR normal, consider MRI6 months proprioceptive rehab
Recurrent sprains, mild laxityPositive drawer, minimal tiltStress XR equivocalTrial bracing + rehab first
Frequent giving way, clear laxityPositive drawer AND tiltStress XR positiveSurgical stabilization
Previous failed surgeryPositive exam, generalized laxityMRI shows tissue qualityGraft reconstruction
Mnemonic

ACPLateral Ligament Complex

A
ATFL (Anterior Talofibular)
Weakest, most injured, intra-articular
C
CFL (Calcaneofibular)
Extra-articular, crosses subtalar joint
P
PTFL (Posterior Talofibular)
Strongest, rarely injured

Memory Hook:ACP = Anterior is weakest, Calcaneofibular is Central, Posterior is strongest!

Mnemonic

PROPSCauses of Functional Instability

P
Proprioceptive deficit
Impaired joint position sense
R
Reflex delay
Delayed peroneal reaction time
O
Omentic (muscle) weakness
Peroneal and inverter weakness
P
Postural control deficit
Balance impairment
S
Somatosensory changes
Altered afferent input

Memory Hook:PROPS support the ankle - without them, it gives way!

Mnemonic

BGTSurgical Options

B
Brostrom (Modified Brostrom-Gould)
Anatomic repair + IER reinforcement
G
Graft reconstruction
Allograft or autograft (peroneus brevis, plantaris)
T
Tenodesis (non-anatomic)
Evans, Chrisman-Snook, Watson-Jones

Memory Hook:BGT = Brostrom is Gold standard, Tenodesis for revisions!

Overview and Epidemiology

Chronic ankle instability (CAI) develops in 20-40% of patients following lateral ankle sprain. It is characterized by recurrent ankle sprains, episodes of giving way, and persistent symptoms lasting greater than 12 months despite conservative treatment. Athletes and active individuals are at highest risk.

Why Does Instability Develop?

Multifactorial: (1) Incomplete ligament healing with elongation/attenuation, (2) Proprioceptive deficit from mechanoreceptor damage, (3) Peroneal muscle weakness, (4) Altered neuromuscular control. Both mechanical and functional factors contribute.

Risk Factors

  • Previous ankle sprain (strongest predictor)
  • Inadequate initial treatment/rehab
  • High-demand sports (basketball, soccer)
  • Generalized ligamentous laxity
  • Cavovarus foot alignment

Associated Conditions

  • Osteochondral lesions of talus (15-25%)
  • Subtalar instability
  • Peroneal tendon pathology
  • Anterior/posterior impingement
  • Syndesmotic injury

Pathophysiology and Mechanisms

Critical Anatomy

The lateral ligament complex consists of three ligaments. The ATFL originates from anterior fibula and inserts on lateral talar body - it is the primary restraint against anterior translation in plantarflexion. The CFL is extra-articular, crosses the subtalar joint, and resists inversion throughout ROM.

Lateral Ankle Ligaments

LigamentOriginInsertionInjury FrequencyFunction
ATFLAnterior distal fibulaLateral talar body85% (most common)Resists anterior translation in PF
CFLDistal fibula tipLateral calcaneus50-75% combinedResists inversion, crosses STJ
PTFLPosterior fibulaPosterior talusRare (5%)Resists posterior translation in DF
Cadaveric dissection showing lateral ankle ligament complex: ATFL, CFL, and PTFL
Click to expand
Lateral ankle ligament complex (cadaveric dissection). Panel A: Posterior view showing PTFL and CFL with fibular origin. Panel B: Lateral view with AiTFL and ATFL visible. Panel C: Posterior view of PiTFL and PTFL. Panel D: Posterolateral view demonstrating all three lateral ligaments (ATFL, CFL, PTFL) sharing common fibular origin - key anatomy for understanding chronic instability.Credit: Jeyaraman M et al. Cureus 2024 (CC-BY 4.0)

ATFL Biomechanics

ATFL taut in plantarflexion - this is why most ankle sprains occur with plantarflexion-inversion mechanism. ATFL provides 100% of resistance to anterior talar translation at 15 degrees plantarflexion. Sectioning ATFL increases anterior drawer by 4-5mm.

ATFL Details

  • Length: 15-20mm, width: 7-8mm
  • Weakest lateral ligament
  • Intra-articular structure
  • 3 distinct bands described
  • Mean load to failure: 139N

CFL Details

  • Length: 20-25mm, cord-like
  • Extra-articular (key exam point)
  • Crosses subtalar joint
  • Overlapped by peroneal tendons
  • Mean load to failure: 310N

Classification Systems

Mechanical vs Functional Classification

TypeDefinitionExaminationTreatment Focus
MechanicalTrue ligamentous laxityPositive drawer/tilt, stress XR abnormalSurgical stabilization
FunctionalGiving way without laxityNormal exam, proprioceptive deficitProprioceptive rehabilitation
CombinedBoth mechanical and functionalLaxity + neuromuscular deficitSurgery + comprehensive rehab

Clinical Significance

Functional instability can exist without mechanical laxity and responds well to rehabilitation. Mechanical instability requires structural restoration. Most patients with CAI have elements of both, requiring comprehensive management.

Classification guides treatment approach and rehabilitation focus.

Clinical Severity Classification

GradeSymptomsObjective FindingsTreatment
MildOccasional giving way, minimal disabilitySubtle laxity, good strengthBracing, proprioceptive training
ModerateFrequent giving way, sport limitationPositive anterior drawerTrial conservative, consider surgery
SevereMultiple sprains/year, unable to participatePositive drawer and tiltSurgical stabilization indicated

Severity helps guide initial treatment and counseling about outcomes.

Concomitant Pathology Classification

LesionIncidence with CAIDetection MethodImpact
Osteochondral lesion15-25%MRI, arthroscopyAddress at time of stabilization
Subtalar instability10-25%Broden stress views, examMay need combined procedure
Peroneal pathology20-40%MRI, dynamic examRepair tears, address retinaculum
Impingement25-30%Clinical exam, MRIDebridement if symptomatic

Always evaluate for associated pathology to optimize surgical planning.

Clinical Assessment

History

  • Mechanism: Index injury and subsequent events
  • Symptoms: Giving way, swelling, pain, difficulty on uneven ground
  • Sports/Activity level: Demands and expectations
  • Previous treatment: Bracing, rehab, surgery

Examination

  • Inspection: Swelling, alignment (cavovarus)
  • Palpation: ATFL, CFL, peroneal tendons, sinus tarsi
  • ROM: Ankle and subtalar joint
  • Stress tests: Anterior drawer, talar tilt

Complete Examination Required

Always assess: subtalar instability (Broden stress), peroneal tendon integrity (subluxation, tears), generalized ligamentous laxity (Beighton score), hindfoot alignment (cavovarus = higher recurrence), and contralateral ankle for comparison.

Clinical Tests for Lateral Ankle Instability

TestTechniquePositive FindingStructure Tested
Anterior drawerStabilize tibia, translate talus anteriorlyGreater than 10mm or greater than 3mm vs contralateralATFL
Talar tiltStabilize tibia, invert hindfootGreater than 10 degrees or greater than 5 degrees asymmetryCFL (+ ATFL if positive)
Inversion stressMaximal inversion with ankle neutralPain, apprehension, increased motionLateral ligament complex
Peroneal testResist eversion, check for subluxationWeakness, subluxation over malleolusPeroneal tendons

Comparison is Key

Absolute values are unreliable due to normal variability. Always compare to contralateral ankle. Asymmetry greater than 3mm (drawer) or greater than 5 degrees (tilt) is more significant than absolute measurements. Examine both ankles in the same position.

Investigations

Imaging Protocol

First LineWeight-Bearing Radiographs

AP, lateral, and mortise views. Assess for malalignment, OLT, talar dome changes, arthritis. Weight-bearing views essential for alignment assessment. Often normal in isolated ligament injury.

Stress ViewsStress Radiographs

Anterior drawer stress (Telos device) and inversion stress views. Quantify mechanical instability. Drawer greater than 10mm or tilt greater than 10 degrees (or asymmetry greater than 3mm/5 degrees) indicates instability.

AdvancedMRI

Assess ligament quality, associated lesions (OLT, peroneal pathology, impingement), and tissue quality for surgical planning. Identifies chronic ligament changes (thickening, discontinuity, scarring).

Stress Radiograph Thresholds

Anterior drawer: greater than 10mm absolute or greater than 3mm asymmetry = ATFL incompetent. Talar tilt: greater than 10 degrees absolute or greater than 5 degrees asymmetry = ATFL + CFL involved. Always compare to uninjured side.

Radiographic Findings

  • Stress XR: Quantify laxity
  • Standard XR: Alignment, OLT, arthritis
  • Broden stress: Subtalar instability
  • Hindfoot alignment view: Cavovarus

MRI Findings

  • ATFL: Thickened, attenuated, absent
  • CFL: Integrity, scarring
  • OLT: Location, size, stability
  • Peroneal tendons: Tears, subluxation

Management Algorithm

📊 Management Algorithm
chronic ankle instability management algorithm
Click to expand
Management algorithm for chronic ankle instabilityCredit: OrthoVellum

Non-Operative Management Protocol

Goal: Restore proprioception, strength, and neuromuscular control.

Rehabilitation Phases

Week 0-4Phase 1

Acute management: RICE for any acute exacerbations. Ankle bracing for activity. Begin ROM exercises. Initiate proprioceptive training (single leg stance, wobble board).

Week 4-12Phase 2

Strengthening and proprioception: Progressive peroneal strengthening. Balance training progression. Sport-specific agility introduction. Continue bracing for activity.

Month 3-6Phase 3

Return to activity: Graduated return to sport. Continue proprioceptive maintenance. Brace use as needed. Monitor for recurrent symptoms.

Conservative Success Factors

60-80% success rate with comprehensive rehabilitation. Better outcomes with: functional instability only, good compliance, lower demands, and adequate peroneal strength. Failure indicators: mechanical laxity, cavovarus foot, high-demand athlete.

Minimum 6 months of supervised rehabilitation before considering surgery.

When to Operate

IndicationRationalePreferred Procedure
Failed conservative (6 months)Persistent symptoms despite rehabBrostrom-Gould
High-demand athlete with laxityDocumented mechanical instabilityBrostrom-Gould or graft reconstruction
Generalized hyperlaxityPoor tissue quality expectedGraft augmentation or reconstruction
Failed previous repairRevision surgery requiredAnatomic graft reconstruction

Decision Making

Absolute indications: Failed 6 months conservative, documented mechanical instability with objective laxity. Relative indications: High-demand athlete with functional limitations, associated pathology requiring surgery (OLT). Always address underlying factors (cavovarus, hyperlaxity).

Patient selection and realistic expectations are critical for good outcomes.

Surgical Technique

Modified Brostrom Procedure (Gold Standard)

Surgical Steps

PositioningStep 1

Lateral decubitus or supine with bump. Thigh tourniquet. Mark landmarks: lateral malleolus, ATFL course, peroneal tendons, sinus tarsi.

ApproachStep 2

Curvilinear incision anterior and distal to lateral malleolus (following ATFL). Identify and protect superficial peroneal nerve branches. Incise IER (inferior extensor retinaculum).

Ligament IdentificationStep 3

Identify ATFL (often attenuated, scarred). Assess CFL through same incision or separate distal limb. Evaluate tissue quality for repair vs reconstruction decision.

ATFL RepairStep 4

Incise ATFL capsule longitudinally at its talar attachment. Prepare fibular footprint with decortication. Pass suture anchors (2-3) into anterior fibula. Pants-over-vest imbrication of ATFL with ankle in neutral.

Gould AugmentationStep 5

Key step: Advance IER (inferior extensor retinaculum) over ATFL repair and secure to fibula with sutures. This provides critical reinforcement and limits anterior translation.

CFL RepairStep 6

If CFL involved, extend incision distally. Repair CFL to calcaneus with suture anchor or directly if tissue quality permits. Tension with ankle in neutral to slight eversion.

Technical Pearls

Tension repair with ankle in neutral - avoid over-tightening (causes stiffness) or under-tightening (recurrence). IER augmentation (Gould) is critical for improved outcomes. Consider arthroscopy first for OLT assessment and treatment.

Post-repair immobilization in walking boot for 2-4 weeks, then progressive weight-bearing and rehabilitation.

Anatomic Graft Reconstruction

Reconstruction Steps

Graft SelectionStep 1

Graft options: Semitendinosus allograft, peroneus brevis (autograft), plantaris, or gracilis. Prepare graft on back table - whipstitch ends, determine length needed.

Tunnel PreparationStep 2

Create bone tunnel in fibula at ATFL footprint. Create tunnel in talus at anatomic ATFL insertion. If including CFL, create calcaneal tunnel. Use fluoroscopy to confirm placement.

Graft PassageStep 3

Pass graft through fibular tunnel first. Then pass through talar tunnel for ATFL reconstruction. For combined ATFL/CFL, continue graft to calcaneus (triangular reconstruction).

FixationStep 4

Fix graft with interference screws or cortical button technique. Tension with ankle in neutral dorsiflexion. Confirm stability with stress testing. Avoid over-tensioning.

Reconstruction Indications

Revision surgery, generalized ligamentous laxity, poor tissue quality (obese, diabetic), high-demand athlete with severe instability. Anatomic reconstruction restores normal kinematics better than non-anatomic tenodesis.

Rehabilitation is slightly more conservative initially compared to Brostrom repair.

Tenodesis Procedures (Historical)

ProcedureTechniqueAdvantagesDisadvantages
EvansPeroneus brevis through fibula tunnelSimple, no bone tunnels in talusNon-anatomic, limits STJ motion
Chrisman-SnookSplit peroneus brevis to fibula and calcaneusReconstructs ATFL and CFLComplex, sacrifices peroneus brevis
Watson-JonesPeroneus brevis through talus and fibulaReconstructs ATFLNon-anatomic, limits motion

Modern Role

Non-anatomic procedures are largely historical - replaced by anatomic reconstruction with grafts. Main criticisms: restrict subtalar motion, non-anatomic tensioning, sacrifice functional tendon. May still be considered in revision or salvage situations.

If tenodesis is required, understand the biomechanical implications for the patient.

Complications

Potential Complications

ComplicationRisk FactorsPreventionManagement
Recurrent instabilityPoor tissue quality, cavovarus, non-complianceProper patient selection, address alignmentRevision reconstruction with graft
StiffnessOver-tensioning, prolonged immobilizationAppropriate tensioning, early ROMPhysiotherapy, possible MUA
Superficial peroneal nerve injurySurgical approachCareful dissection, identify nerveObservation, most resolve
Wound complicationsDiabetes, obesity, smokingMeticulous technique, optimize healthWound care, possible debridement
Subtalar stiffness (tenodesis)Non-anatomic proceduresUse anatomic techniquesPT, accept some limitation

Recurrence Risk Factors

Higher recurrence with: cavovarus foot (address surgically if significant), generalized ligamentous laxity (use graft augmentation), poor rehabilitation compliance, return to high-demand sport too early. Recurrence rate 5-15% even with modern techniques.

Cavovarus Foot

Cavovarus alignment places lateral ligaments at increased stress. If significant hindfoot varus present, consider calcaneal osteotomy (Dwyer) at time of ligament reconstruction to correct alignment and reduce recurrence risk.

Postoperative Care

Rehabilitation Protocol

Week 0-2Phase 1

Immobilization: Below-knee cast or controlled motion boot. Non-weight-bearing initially. Elevate, ice, wound care. Begin toe/knee ROM to prevent stiffness.

Week 2-6Phase 2

Protected mobilization: CAM boot weight-bearing as tolerated. Begin ankle ROM exercises out of boot. Avoid inversion initially. Start isometric strengthening.

Week 6-12Phase 3

Progressive loading: Wean from boot to supportive footwear. Progressive resistance training. Proprioception exercises. Gait training, stationary bike.

Month 3-6Phase 4

Return to activity: Sport-specific drills. Agility and plyometric progression. Criteria-based return to sport. Consider bracing for return.

Return Criteria

  • Greater than 90% strength vs contralateral
  • Full ROM without pain
  • Passed functional hop tests
  • Sport-specific drills tolerated
  • Typically 4-6 months post-op

Bracing Post-Surgery

  • Consider brace for first 6-12 months of sport
  • May use permanently for high-demand activities
  • Ankle support reduces re-injury risk
  • Transition to tape if preferred

Outcomes and Prognosis

Outcomes by Procedure

ProcedureSuccess RateRecurrenceReturn to Sport
Brostrom-Gould (primary)85-95%5-10%85-90%
Anatomic graft reconstruction80-90%5-15%80-85%
Non-anatomic tenodesis70-80%10-20%70-80%
Revision surgery70-85%15-25%70-80%

Long-Term Outcomes

Brostrom-Gould has excellent long-term outcomes with 20+ year follow-up studies showing maintained stability. Anatomic reconstruction approaches similar outcomes when properly indicated. Key to success: appropriate patient selection, address associated pathology, comprehensive rehabilitation.

Evidence Base

Level IV
📚 DiGiovanni BF et al. Associated Injuries in CAI
Key Findings:
  • Arthroscopy in 61 CAI patients revealed: OLT 22%, synovitis 75%, loose bodies 26%. Highlights importance of addressing associated pathology during stabilization.
Clinical Implication: Consider diagnostic arthroscopy at time of stabilization to address OLT and impingement.
Source: Foot Ankle Int 2000

Level IV
📚 Bell SJ et al. Brostrom Long-Term Outcomes
Key Findings:
  • Long-term follow-up (26 years mean) of Brostrom procedure showed 87% good/excellent results. Stability maintained over time. Low rate of late arthrosis.
Clinical Implication: Brostrom-Gould provides durable long-term stability and excellent outcomes.
Source: AJSM 2006

Level III
📚 Krips R et al. Anatomic vs Non-Anatomic Reconstruction
Key Findings:
  • Compared anatomic (Brostrom) vs non-anatomic (Evans, Watson-Jones) procedures. Anatomic repair superior for restoration of normal ankle kinematics and subtalar motion preservation.
Clinical Implication: Anatomic reconstruction preferred - preserves normal biomechanics.
Source: JBJS Am 2001

Level IV
📚 Drakos MC et al. Peroneal Tendon Pathology in CAI
Key Findings:
  • High rate of peroneal pathology (40%) in CAI patients. Longitudinal tears and tendinopathy common. Address at time of stabilization for optimal outcomes.
Clinical Implication: Always assess peroneals - address pathology during reconstruction.
Source: Foot Ankle Int 2014

Level I (Guideline)
📚 Vuurberg G et al. Diagnosis and Treatment of CAI - ESSKA Guideline
Key Findings:
  • Systematic review: 6 months conservative treatment first. Modified Brostrom is first-line surgery. Anatomic reconstruction for revision. Address associated pathology.
Clinical Implication: ESSKA guidelines support conservative-first approach, Brostrom for surgical cases.
Source: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2018

Exam Viva Scenarios

Practice these scenarios to excel in your viva examination

VIVA SCENARIOStandard

Scenario 1: Young Athlete with Recurrent Sprains

EXAMINER

"A 22-year-old soccer player presents with recurrent ankle sprains over 2 years. He has completed 6 months of physiotherapy with bracing. Examination shows positive anterior drawer (12mm vs 6mm contralateral). He wants to return to competitive sport."

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This describes a young athlete with chronic lateral ankle instability who has failed appropriate conservative treatment. The asymmetric anterior drawer (12mm vs 6mm = 6mm difference, greater than 3mm threshold) confirms mechanical instability. My assessment would include: 1. **Complete examination**: Assess CFL (talar tilt), peroneal strength, subtalar stability, and hindfoot alignment (cavovarus increases recurrence risk). 2. **Imaging**: Weight-bearing XR for alignment and OLT. MRI to assess ligament quality and associated pathology. 3. **Surgical planning**: Given failed conservative treatment, documented mechanical instability, and high-demand athlete, surgery is indicated. **My surgical approach**: Modified Brostrom-Gould procedure: - Lateral approach, identify and protect superficial peroneal nerve - ATFL repair with suture anchors to fibular footprint - Gould augmentation with IER for reinforcement - Assess CFL and repair if involved - Consider diagnostic arthroscopy first for OLT **Postoperative**: Boot for 2 weeks, WBAT weeks 2-6, progressive rehabilitation, return to sport 4-6 months with criteria-based progression.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
6 months conservative required before surgery
Asymmetry greater than 3mm more important than absolute values
Brostrom-Gould is gold standard first-line surgery
IER augmentation (Gould modification) is critical for good outcomes
COMMON TRAPS
✗Jumping to surgery without adequate conservative trial
✗Forgetting to assess for associated pathology (OLT, peroneals)
✗Not addressing cavovarus alignment if present
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"What if he has generalized ligamentous laxity?"
"How would cavovarus alignment change your plan?"
"What is your approach if you find an OLT?"
VIVA SCENARIOChallenging

Scenario 2: Failed Previous Repair

EXAMINER

"A 35-year-old woman had a Brostrom repair 3 years ago that failed after 18 months. She now has persistent instability, giving way episodes, and anterior drawer 14mm (vs 5mm contralateral). MRI shows attenuated ligament remnants."

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This is a challenging case of recurrent instability after failed primary Brostrom repair. The significant asymmetry (9mm difference) and MRI findings of attenuated tissue indicate that repeat Brostrom repair is unlikely to succeed. My approach would be: 1. **Analyze failure**: Why did the initial repair fail? Consider: poor tissue quality, non-compliance, cavovarus alignment, generalized laxity, or associated pathology not addressed. 2. **Complete assessment**: Beighton score for hypermobility, hindfoot alignment, peroneal function, and MRI review for tissue quality and associated lesions. 3. **Surgical planning**: Given revision setting and attenuated tissue, I would proceed with anatomic reconstruction using graft. **Surgical approach**: Anatomic ATFL/CFL reconstruction - Graft selection: Semitendinosus allograft preferred (avoids donor site morbidity) - Create anatomic bone tunnels in fibula, talus (and calcaneus if CFL reconstruction needed) - Pass graft through tunnels anatomically - Fix with interference screws or cortical button - Tension in neutral dorsiflexion **Address contributing factors**: If cavovarus present, consider calcaneal osteotomy. If hyperlaxity, ensure adequate graft reconstruction. **Postoperative**: Slightly more conservative - NWB 4 weeks, protected WB 4-6 weeks, return to sport 6 months.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Revision surgery requires graft reconstruction - not repeat Brostrom
Analyze why initial surgery failed
Address underlying factors (alignment, laxity)
Anatomic reconstruction restores normal kinematics
COMMON TRAPS
✗Attempting repeat Brostrom in attenuated tissue
✗Not looking for contributing factors to failure
✗Using non-anatomic tenodesis instead of anatomic reconstruction
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"What graft would you use and why?"
"How do you create the bone tunnels?"
"What outcomes can you counsel her to expect?"
VIVA SCENARIOStandard

Scenario 3: Instability with OLT

EXAMINER

"A 28-year-old basketball player has CAI confirmed on stress XR. MRI also shows a 1.2cm medial talar dome osteochondral lesion with overlying cartilage damage. He has failed conservative treatment."

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This presents two surgical problems requiring combined management: chronic ankle instability and an osteochondral lesion of the talus. My approach: 1. **OLT assessment**: Size 1.2cm is moderate. Location (medial dome) and cartilage damage suggest this is symptomatic. In a 28-year-old athlete, cartilage preservation is priority. 2. **Staging**: Arthroscopy will provide definitive OLT assessment and staging. 3. **Combined surgical plan**: Address both pathologies in single surgery. **Surgical approach**: 1. **Arthroscopy first**: - Assess OLT: stability of fragment, cartilage quality, size, containment - For 1.2cm contained lesion with cartilage damage: microfracture is first-line - Debride unstable cartilage, create stable vertical margins - Microfracture technique to exposed bone 2. **Lateral stabilization**: - Modified Brostrom-Gould through lateral approach - ATFL repair with suture anchors - IER augmentation **Postoperative considerations**: - OLT microfracture requires NWB 6-8 weeks for fibrocartilage formation - Combine with instability rehab protocol - Return to sport delayed to 6 months minimum **Alternative OLT options** if fragment suitable: fixation, or if larger lesion: OATS or ACI.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Address OLT and instability in combined procedure
Arthroscopy first to assess and treat OLT
Microfracture for contained lesions under 1.5cm
NWB period extended for OLT healing
COMMON TRAPS
✗Ignoring OLT and only addressing instability
✗Not performing arthroscopy to properly stage OLT
✗Rushing return to sport - OLT needs protection
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"What if the lesion was 2cm and uncontained?"
"How does NWB for OLT affect your instability rehab?"
"What outcomes for microfracture in athletes?"
VIVA SCENARIOStandard

Scenario 4: Functional vs Mechanical Instability

EXAMINER

"A 30-year-old recreational runner has recurrent giving way and ankle sprains. She has completed 3 months of physiotherapy. Examination shows negative anterior drawer and talar tilt. She has significant peroneal weakness and poor single-leg balance."

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This describes a patient with predominantly functional instability - she has symptoms of instability but no objective mechanical laxity on examination. The key findings are peroneal weakness and proprioceptive deficit. My approach: 1. **Confirm diagnosis**: Negative stress tests (drawer and tilt) indicate no mechanical laxity. This is primarily functional instability. 2. **Assess completeness of rehabilitation**: Only 3 months completed - guidelines recommend 6 months before considering failure. 3. **Identify specific deficits**: Peroneal weakness and balance impairment need targeted intervention. **Management plan**: 1. **Continued conservative treatment**: Full 6 months of targeted rehabilitation 2. **Specific program**: - Peroneal strengthening: progressive resistance eversion exercises - Proprioceptive training: wobble board, single-leg stance, perturbation training - Balance progression: static → dynamic → sport-specific - External support: brace for activity during rehab period 3. **Re-assess at 6 months**: If symptoms persist with no mechanical laxity, consider: - More intensive supervised program - Sports psychology input if fear of re-injury contributing - Accept some ongoing symptoms with activity modification **Surgery is NOT indicated** for pure functional instability with no mechanical laxity.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Functional instability = no mechanical laxity, neuromuscular deficit
Not a surgical problem - rehabilitation is the treatment
Minimum 6 months rehabilitation before declaring failure
Target specific deficits: peroneals, proprioception, balance
COMMON TRAPS
✗Operating on functional instability without laxity
✗Giving up on conservative treatment too early
✗Not distinguishing functional from mechanical instability
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"What if she develops mechanical laxity at 6 months?"
"What specific exercises for peroneal strengthening?"
"What role does ankle bracing play long-term?"

MCQ Practice Points

Primary Restraint

Q: Which ligament is the primary restraint against anterior translation of the talus in plantarflexion? A: Anterior talofibular ligament (ATFL) - The ATFL is taut in plantarflexion and provides 100% of resistance to anterior talar translation at 15 degrees plantarflexion. It is the weakest and most commonly injured lateral ligament.

CFL Unique Property

Q: What unique anatomical feature of the CFL makes it important for subtalar stability? A: CFL is extra-articular and crosses the subtalar joint - Unlike the ATFL which is intra-articular, the CFL crosses both the ankle and subtalar joints, contributing to stability of both articulations.

Stress Test Thresholds

Q: What is considered a positive anterior drawer stress test in chronic ankle instability? A: Greater than 10mm absolute OR greater than 3mm asymmetry compared to contralateral - Side-to-side comparison is more reliable than absolute values due to individual variation in ligamentous laxity.

Surgical Procedure

Q: What is the gold standard first-line surgical procedure for chronic ankle instability? A: Modified Brostrom-Gould - This anatomic repair involves ATFL imbrication to the fibula with suture anchors plus reinforcement with the inferior extensor retinaculum (Gould modification), achieving 85-95% success rates.

IER Augmentation

Q: What is the purpose of the Gould modification in the Brostrom procedure? A: Reinforcement with inferior extensor retinaculum (IER) - The IER is advanced over the ATFL repair and secured to the fibula, providing additional anterior restraint and improving outcomes compared to ATFL repair alone.

Australian Context

Clinical Practice

  • Sports medicine physicians manage initial assessment
  • Orthopaedic referral for failed conservative or mechanical instability
  • Physiotherapy-led rehabilitation programs
  • High participation in ankle-stressing sports (rugby, AFL, basketball)

Healthcare Setting

  • Day surgery for Brostrom-Gould
  • Public and private settings
  • Sports clinics for comprehensive care
  • Return-to-sport programs in sports medicine units

Orthopaedic Exam Focus

Australian examiners will expect: Understanding of mechanical vs functional instability, anatomy of lateral ligament complex (ATFL taut in plantarflexion, CFL extra-articular), stress radiograph thresholds, Brostrom-Gould technique, and indications for graft reconstruction in revision settings.

CHRONIC ANKLE INSTABILITY

High-Yield Exam Summary

Key Anatomy

  • •ATFL: weakest ligament, intra-articular, taut in PLANTARFLEXION
  • •CFL: EXTRA-ARTICULAR, crosses subtalar joint, taut in DF
  • •PTFL: strongest, rarely injured
  • •Anterior drawer tests ATFL; Talar tilt tests CFL

Instability Types

  • •MECHANICAL: true laxity (positive stress tests/XR)
  • •FUNCTIONAL: giving way WITHOUT laxity (proprioceptive deficit)
  • •Most CAI patients have BOTH components
  • •Surgery for mechanical; Rehab for functional

Stress Test Thresholds

  • •Anterior drawer: greater than 10mm OR greater than 3mm asymmetry = positive
  • •Talar tilt: greater than 10 degrees OR greater than 5 degrees asymmetry = ATFL + CFL
  • •Always COMPARE to contralateral side
  • •Asymmetry more reliable than absolute values

Surgical Approach

  • •Brostrom-Gould = GOLD STANDARD (85-95% success)
  • •Gould modification = IER reinforcement (critical)
  • •Graft reconstruction for: revision, hyperlaxity, poor tissue
  • •Non-anatomic tenodesis largely HISTORICAL

Exam Pearls

  • •6 months conservative before surgery
  • •ATFL provides 100% resistance to anterior translation at 15 degrees PF
  • •Always assess for OLT (15-25%), peroneals, subtalar instability
  • •Cavovarus = higher recurrence - consider calcaneal osteotomy
Quick Stats
Reading Time90 min
Related Topics

Medial Ankle Sprains

Hip Flexor Strains

Distal Biceps Rupture

External Impingement of the Shoulder