Andrea N Veljkovic1,2,3, Timothy R Daniels4, Mark A Glazebrook5,6, Peter J Dryden1,7, Murray J Penner1,2,3, Kevin J Wing1,2,3, Alastair S E Younger1,2,3. 1. Division of Distal Extremities, Department of Orthopaedics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 2. Footbridge Centre for Integrated Orthopaedic Care, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 3. St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 4. Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, St. Michael's Hospital and University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. 5. Division of Orthopedic Surgery, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. 6. Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. 7. Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Vancouver Island Health Authority, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: End-stage ankle arthritis is a disabling condition that has a similar effect on morbidity, pain, and loss of function to hip arthritis. We compared clinical outcomes of total ankle replacement (TAR) involving the HINTEGRA prosthesis (Integra LifeSciences), arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis (AAA), and open ankle arthrodesis (OAA) in patients with isolated, non-deformed end-stage ankle arthritis. METHODS: Patients ≥18 years old who underwent TAR, AAA, or OAA from 2002 to 2012 with a minimum follow-up of 2 years were retrospectively identified from the Canadian Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (COFAS) Prospective Ankle Reconstruction Database. All patients had symptomatic COFAS Type-1 end-stage ankle arthritis without intra-articular or extra-articular deformity or surrounding joint arthritis. Clinical outcomes included the Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale (AOS) and Short Form-36 (SF-36). Revision was defined as removal of 1 or both metal ankle prosthesis components for TAR and as reoperation for malposition, malunion, or nonunion for AAA and OAA. RESULTS: Analysis included 238 ankles (88 TAR, 50 AAA, and 100 OAA) in 229 patients with a mean follow-up of 43.3 ± 18.5 months. The TAR group had more female patients (55%; p = 0.0318) and a higher mean age (p = 0.0005). Preoperative AOS pain, disability, and total scores were similar for all groups. SF-36 physical and mental component summary scores were similar across groups, both preoperatively and postoperatively. Improvement in AOS total score was significantly larger for TAR (34.4 ± 22.6) and AAA (38.3 ± 23.6) compared with OAA (25.8 ± 25.5; p = 0.005). Improvement in AOS disability score was also significantly larger for TAR (36.7 ± 24.3) and AAA (40.5 ± 26.4) compared with OAA (26.0 ± 26.2; p = 0.0013). However, the greater improvements did not meet the minimal clinically important difference. The TAR group underwent more reoperations than AAA and OAA groups (p < 0.0001). Revision rates were similar for all 3 groups (p = 0.262). CONCLUSIONS: AAA and OAA resulted in comparable clinical outcomes to TAR in patients with non-deformed, COFAS Type-1 end-stage ankle arthritis. The rate of component revision in patients who underwent TAR was similar to the rate of revision for patients who underwent AAA or OAA; however, TAR patients underwent a greater number of additional procedures. Overall, AAA and TAR involving the HINTEGRA prosthesis were not significantly different surgical options in terms of short-term outcomes; patients should be counseled regarding higher reoperation rates for TAR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
BACKGROUND:End-stage ankle arthritis is a disabling condition that has a similar effect on morbidity, pain, and loss of function to hip arthritis. We compared clinical outcomes of total ankle replacement (TAR) involving the HINTEGRA prosthesis (Integra LifeSciences), arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis (AAA), and open ankle arthrodesis (OAA) in patients with isolated, non-deformed end-stage ankle arthritis. METHODS:Patients ≥18 years old who underwent TAR, AAA, or OAA from 2002 to 2012 with a minimum follow-up of 2 years were retrospectively identified from the Canadian Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (COFAS) Prospective Ankle Reconstruction Database. All patients had symptomatic COFAS Type-1 end-stage ankle arthritis without intra-articular or extra-articular deformity or surrounding joint arthritis. Clinical outcomes included the Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale (AOS) and Short Form-36 (SF-36). Revision was defined as removal of 1 or both metal ankle prosthesis components for TAR and as reoperation for malposition, malunion, or nonunion for AAA and OAA. RESULTS: Analysis included 238 ankles (88 TAR, 50 AAA, and 100 OAA) in 229 patients with a mean follow-up of 43.3 ± 18.5 months. The TAR group had more female patients (55%; p = 0.0318) and a higher mean age (p = 0.0005). Preoperative AOS pain, disability, and total scores were similar for all groups. SF-36 physical and mental component summary scores were similar across groups, both preoperatively and postoperatively. Improvement in AOS total score was significantly larger for TAR (34.4 ± 22.6) and AAA (38.3 ± 23.6) compared with OAA (25.8 ± 25.5; p = 0.005). Improvement in AOS disability score was also significantly larger for TAR (36.7 ± 24.3) and AAA (40.5 ± 26.4) compared with OAA (26.0 ± 26.2; p = 0.0013). However, the greater improvements did not meet the minimal clinically important difference. The TAR group underwent more reoperations than AAA and OAA groups (p < 0.0001). Revision rates were similar for all 3 groups (p = 0.262). CONCLUSIONS: AAA and OAA resulted in comparable clinical outcomes to TAR in patients with non-deformed, COFAS Type-1 end-stage ankle arthritis. The rate of component revision in patients who underwent TAR was similar to the rate of revision for patients who underwent AAA or OAA; however, TAR patients underwent a greater number of additional procedures. Overall, AAA and TAR involving the HINTEGRA prosthesis were not significantly different surgical options in terms of short-term outcomes; patients should be counseled regarding higher reoperation rates for TAR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Authors: Federico Morelli; Giorgio Princi; Matteo Romano Cantagalli; Marco Rossini; Ludovico Caperna; Daniele Mazza; Andrea Ferretti Journal: World J Orthop Date: 2021-12-18
Authors: Mario Herrera-Pérez; Victor Valderrabano; Alexandre L Godoy-Santos; César de César Netto; David González-Martín; Sergio Tejero Journal: EFORT Open Rev Date: 2022-07-05
Authors: Maksim A Shlykov; Ian Savage-Elliott; Timothy M Lonergan; Sandra E Klein; Jonathon D Backus; Jeffrey E Johnson; Jeremy J McCormick Journal: Foot Ankle Orthop Date: 2022-03-19