Postoperative Assessment of Chronic Lateral Ankle Instability Treatment—Broström–Gould vs Arthro-Broström: 10-year Follow-up

Introduction: Ankle sprains are among the most common ligament injuries of the lower limbs and are highly prevalent among athletes. While conservative treatment is effective for most patients, approximately 20% progress to chronic instability, which may require surgical intervention. The modified Broström–Gould technique is considered the gold standard, and the arthroscopic arthro-Broström technique has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative. This study aims to compare the functional outcomes of both techniques using the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Scale with a 10-year follow-up period. Materials and methods: This retrospective longitudinal study compared two treatment groups. A total of 113 patients with chronic lateral ankle ligament instability who underwent surgery between January 2011 and December 2014 were evaluated. They were divided into two groups—modified Broström–Gould (n = 46) and arthro-Broström (n = 67). All patients had previously undergone at least 6 months of conservative treatment. The AOFAS score was applied pre- and postoperatively. Results: No statistically significant differences were found between the groups regarding clinical characteristics. Both groups showed significant postoperative improvements in AOFAS scores (p < 0.001), with mean increases of 38.6 (Broström–Gould group) and 39 points (arthro-Broström group). The arthro-Broström group had a slightly higher final mean score (92.1 vs 91.4), though there was no statistical difference between the techniques (p = 0.847). Conclusion: The modified Broström–Gould and arthro-Broström techniques were effective in treating chronic ankle instability. These techniques provided significant functional improvement and a low complication rate. The arthroscopic approach offers several advantages, including reduced morbidity and better visualization of associated injuries, making it a safe and effective option, similar to traditional open surgery. The choice of technique should be based on the surgeon's experience, the patient's characteristics, and the prospect of better outcomes.