Bi O. Jeong

Kwang Hwan Park, Kwang-Bok Lee, Seung Hwan Han, Bi O Jeong, Su-Young Bae, Hak Jun Kim, Jae Yong Park; The Insurance Committee of Korean Foot and Ankle Society. JKFAS 2026;30:94-103. https://doi.org/10.14193/jkfas.2026.30.3.94

Sung Hun Won, Hak Jun Kim, Bi O Jeong, Dong-Il Chun, Young Rak Choi, Se-Jin Park. JKFAS 2025;29:91-6. https://doi.org/10.14193/jkfas.2025.29.3.91

Purpose: The prevalence of foot and ankle disorders continues to rise, driven by both an aging population and increased participation in sports. Since Takagi first introduced arthroscopy to the ankle in 1939, the field has evolved remarkably—particularly since the 1980s, with the development of smaller-diameter scopes and advanced instrumentation. This review aims to provide an updated overview of current arthroscopic techniques for common ankle pathologies, including osteochondral lesions of the talus (OLTs), chronic ankle instability (CAI), and ankle osteoarthritis. Additionally, it discusses clinical outcomes and future directions in the field.Current Concepts: Ankle arthroscopy is now established as a minimally invasive and indispensable modality for both diagnosis and treatment. In OLTs, procedures such as microfracture, retrograde drilling, osteochondral grafting, and autologous matrix-induced chondrocyte implantation have shown promising results. CAI is increasingly managed arthroscopically, particularly with modified Broström repairs that allow for simultaneous treatment of intra-articular lesions. In advanced osteoarthritis, arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis offers reduced soft tissue morbidity compared to open surgery, while achieving similar or superior fusion rates. Nevertheless, meticulous surgical planning and a thorough understanding of ankle anatomy are critical to minimize complications.Discussion and Conclusion: Although arthroscopic surgery offers clear benefits, the ankle’s narrow joint space and complex anatomy require advanced surgical proficiency. Standardized training programs and ongoing refinement of surgical techniques are essential. Emerging technologies—including high-resolution arthroscopy, augmented reality, biologic adjuncts, and regenerative therapies—are anticipated to further improve precision and long-term outcomes. With continued research and technological integration, ankle arthroscopy will maintain a central role in providing patient-specific, function-preserving care.

Jeong BO, et al. Transl Clin Pharmacol. 2023 Mar;31(1):49-58. https://doi.org/10.12793/tcp.2023.31.e5

Ahn J, et al. Clin Orthop Surg. 2022 Sep;14:e80. https://doi.org/10.4055/cios21272

Purpose: This study sought to confirm whether traditional open Broström–Gould repair and arthroscopic Broström–Gould repair for chronic ankle instability (CAI) would produce comparable radiological and clinical outcomes in high‐demand patients.Methods: This retrospective case–cohort study included high‐demand patients, as determined by a pre‐injury Tegner Activity Level ≥ 6, who underwent Broström–Gould repair and were followed up for ≥ 2 years. Patients were divided into the arthroscopic Broström–Gould repair group (AS Group) and the open Broström–Gould repair group (Open Group). Perioperative radiological assessments were performed. The Tegner Activity Levels, Foot and Ankle Outcome Scores (FAOSs), Karlsson and Peterson (K–P) scores, and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society ankle–hindfoot (AOFAS) scores were evaluated clinically.Results: A total of 65 patients (31 from the AS Group and 34 from the Open Group) were included in the study. There were no differences in age, sex, body mass index, preoperative anterior talar translation, talar tilt, signal‐to‐noise ratio, FAOS, K–P score, or AOFAS score between the two groups (n.s.). The preinjury median Tegner Activity Level was 7 and unchanged at the final follow‐up in both groups. Postoperative stress radiographs showed improvement; however, the groups did not differ significantly. The FAOS, K–P scores, and AOFAS scores improved in each group (P < 0.001). However, the clinical scores did not differ between the groups (all n.s.).Conclusions: Traditional open and arthroscopic Broström–Gould repair for CAI in high‐demand patients had comparable radiological and clinical outcomes. Clinically, arthroscopic Broström–Gould repair may represent a viable surgical alternative to open Broström–Gould repair in high‐demand patients.Level of evidence: Level III.