Outcomes of Isolated Peroneal Tendoscopy for Treatment of Peroneal Tendon Disorders

• Main Authors: Jeremy T. Smith MD, Abdurrahman Abdurrob MS, Adam Sangeorzan MD, Seth O’Donnell MD, Eric M. Bluman MD, PhD
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: SAGE Publishing 2019-10-01
• Series: Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics
• Online Access: https://doi.org/10.1177/2473011419S00070

Category: Arthroscopy Introduction/Purpose: Peroneal tendoscopy may be used to treat patients with peroneal tendinopathy. It is typically used for diagnostic purposes and to address tendinopathy in the absence of large tendon tears. Its value includes preservation of the superior peroneal retinaculum, small incision size, and faster postoperative recovery compared to open treatment. The goal of this study is to explore the functional outcomes of patients who have undergone isolated peroneal tendoscopy. Methods: Consecutive adult patients who underwent isolated peroneal tendoscopy between January 2010 and January 2018 at a single Foot and Ankle center were identified. The electronic medical record and operative notes were reviewed to identify patients with a minimum 12-month follow-up. Those undergoing open tendon repair, tendon transfer, peroneal groove deepening, and any other concurrent foot or ankle procedure were excluded from the study. Eligible patients were administered the PROMIS Physical Function-Short Form 10A (PF SF10A), Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM), and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Demographic information was also collected. Data was pooled, and descriptive analyses and unpaired T-tests were conducted. Results: Thirty patients met inclusion criteria and 22/30 patients (73%) were able to be reached. Our patient cohort was predominantly female (90.9%), had a mean age of 46.4 years, and an average BMI of 27.6. The mean pre-operative FAAM and PROMIS PF SF10A for patients were 58.3 and 39.7, while the mean post-operative FAAM and PROMIS PF SF10A were 83.3 and 50.5, respectively. There was a statistically significant improvement between the mean pre-operative and post-operative FAAM and PROMIS PF SF10A scores for patients (p =0.0050 and 0.0025, respectively) with a mean improvement of 25.0 in FAAM and 10.8 for PROMIS PF SF10A scoring. At an average of 33.4 month follow-up, the mean VAS for pain was 20.9 out of 100. Conclusion: Isolated peroneal tendoscopy is an effective treatment for patients who have peroneal pain in the absence of frank tears or tendon instability. The improvement in FAAM and PF SF10A scores was statistically significant and exceeds published MCIDs for both FAAM and PROMIS PF SF10A. Additional research is required to further evaluate the effectiveness of peroneal tendoscopy as compared to other methods of treating peroneal tendinopathy, such as open peroneal tenosynovectomy.