BACKGROUND: Subtalar arthrodesis (SA) is the preferred treatment for painful isolated subtalar disease. Although results are generally favourable, analysis of current operative techniques will help optimizing this treatment. The aim was to give an overview of SA-techniques and their pitfalls. Possible solutions were identified. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was performed for papers that presented SA operative techniques. The general technique was divided into phases: surgical approach, cartilage removal, bone graft selection, hindfoot deformity correction and fixation. RESULTS: The published series were invariably retrospective reviews of small heterogenous groups of different hindfoot pathologies. The weighted outcome rate for SA was 85% (68-100%) performed in 766 feet and for SA requiring correction of malalignment 65% (36-96%) in 1001 feet. Non-union (weighted percentage 12%), malalignment (18%), and screw removal (17%) were the prevailing late complications. PITFALLS: The following pitfalls were identified: 1) early complications related to the incisions made in open approaches, 2) insufficient cartilage removal, improper bone graft selection and fixation techniques, all possibly leading to non-union, 3) morbidity caused by bone graft harvesting and secondary screw removal, 4) under- or overcorrection of the hindfoot possibly due to improper intraoperative verification and 5) inadequate assessment of bony fusion. SOLUTIONS: The review provides solutions to possibly overcome some pitfalls: 1) if applicable use an arthroscopic approach in combination with distraction devices and new burrs, 2) if possible use local bone graft or allografts, 3) use two screws for fixation to prevent rotational micromotion, and 4) improve assessment of operative outcome by application of appropriate assessment of bony fusion and alignment. CONCLUSION: The review provides practical suggestions to optimize SA-techniques. Copyright (c) 2009 European Foot and Ankle Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: Subtalar arthrodesis (SA) is the preferred treatment for painful isolated subtalar disease. Although results are generally favourable, analysis of current operative techniques will help optimizing this treatment. The aim was to give an overview of SA-techniques and their pitfalls. Possible solutions were identified. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was performed for papers that presented SA operative techniques. The general technique was divided into phases: surgical approach, cartilage removal, bone graft selection, hindfoot deformity correction and fixation. RESULTS: The published series were invariably retrospective reviews of small heterogenous groups of different hindfoot pathologies. The weighted outcome rate for SA was 85% (68-100%) performed in 766 feet and for SA requiring correction of malalignment 65% (36-96%) in 1001 feet. Non-union (weighted percentage 12%), malalignment (18%), and screw removal (17%) were the prevailing late complications. PITFALLS: The following pitfalls were identified: 1) early complications related to the incisions made in open approaches, 2) insufficient cartilage removal, improper bone graft selection and fixation techniques, all possibly leading to non-union, 3) morbidity caused by bone graft harvesting and secondary screw removal, 4) under- or overcorrection of the hindfoot possibly due to improper intraoperative verification and 5) inadequate assessment of bony fusion. SOLUTIONS: The review provides solutions to possibly overcome some pitfalls: 1) if applicable use an arthroscopic approach in combination with distraction devices and new burrs, 2) if possible use local bone graft or allografts, 3) use two screws for fixation to prevent rotational micromotion, and 4) improve assessment of operative outcome by application of appropriate assessment of bony fusion and alignment. CONCLUSION: The review provides practical suggestions to optimize SA-techniques. Copyright (c) 2009 European Foot and Ankle Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Authors: Roel P M Hendrickx; Peter A J de Leeuw; Pau Golano; C Niek van Dijk; Gino M M J Kerkhoffs Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2014-05-08 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Alisha J Poonja; Mika Hirano; Djavlon Khakimov; Naomi Ojumah; R Shane Tubbs; Marios Loukas; Piotr B Kozlowski; Khurram H Khan; Anthony C DiLandro; Anthony V D'Antoni Journal: Cureus Date: 2017-06-22
Authors: Nileshkumar Chaudhari; Alexandre Leme Godoy-Santos; Cesar de Cesar Netto; Ramon Rodriguez; Shouchen Dun; Jun Kit He; Haley McKissack; Glenn S Fleisig; Eduardo Araujo Pires; Ashish Shah Journal: Einstein (Sao Paulo) Date: 2020-03-06