| Literature DB >> 35199184 |
Jennifer E Hagen1,2, Andrew K Sands3, Michael Swords4, Stefan Rammelt5, Nina Schmitz1,6, Geoff Richards1, Boyko Gueorguiev1, Firas Souleiman7,8.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Pathologies of the medial talus (e.g., fractures, tarsal coalitions) can lead to symptomatic problems such as pain and nonunion. Bony resection may be a good solution for both. It is unclear how much of the medial talus can be taken before the subtalar joint becomes unstable. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect a limited resection of the medial talar facet and the anteromedial portion of the posterior talar facet has on subtalar stability.Entities:
Keywords: medial talar facet resection; subtalar instability; talocalcaneal coalition; talus fracture; weight-bearing
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35199184 PMCID: PMC9532311 DOI: 10.1007/s00068-022-01915-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg ISSN: 1863-9933 Impact factor: 2.374
Fig. 1(Left) Custom-made loading frame with an artificial specimen mounted for CT scanning under weight-bearing. The distal end of the frame is made out of radiolucent composite material, the main part is made out of aluminum. A pneumatic cylinder connects to a compressed air system at the proximal end of the frame; (right) human cadaveric specimen mounted in the loading frame with foot oriented in 15° inversion by use of a 15° wooden wedge underneath the medial column of the foot
Fig. 2(Top) Axial CT views demonstrating 10, 20, and 30% resections of the medial talar facet and the anteromedial portion of the posterior talar facet; (bottom) coronal CT views demonstrating 10, 20 and 30% resections as described above
Fig. 3(Left) Medial and (right) posterior view of the hindfoot. Red lines demonstrate the resection site
Fig. 4Sagittal CT view demonstrating the definition of the three coronal planes—anterior, middle, and posterior—used for measurement of subtalar vertical angle (SVA) and talar subluxation
Fig. 5(Left) Bar diagrams depicting subtalar vertical angle, (middle) coronal posterior facet angle and (right) talar subluxation in terms of mean and standard error of mean for neutral, inversion and eversion position of the foot under single-legged stance loading (700 N). No significant differences were detected for each of the outcomes between resected and intact states in same foot positioning
Fig. 6(Left) Bar diagrams depicting anteroposterior and (right) lateral Kite angles in terms of mean and standard error of mean for neutral, inversion and eversion position of the foot under single-legged stance loading (700 N). No significant differences were detected for each of the outcomes between resected and intact states in same foot positioning
P values for comparisons of the outcomes subtalar vertical angle (SVA), coronal posterior facet angle (PFA), talar subluxation (TS), anteroposterior (KA—AP) and lateral (KA—lateral) Kite angles between resected and intact states, as well as among resected states in neutral (N), inversion (Inv) and eversion (Ev) foot positions under single-legged stance loading (700 N). Comparisons for SVA and TS include all measurements at the three coronal planes (anterior, middle and posterior) along the posterior facet
| Outcome | Position | Resection versus intact | Among resections | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10% | 20% | 30% | |||
| SVA | N | ≥ 0.48 | ≥ 0.26 | ≥ 0.67 | ≥ 0.69 |
| Inv | ≥ 0.10 | ≥ 0.12 | ≥ 0.16 | ≥ 0.14 | |
| Ev | ≥ 0.26 | ≥ 0.60 | ≥ 0.58 | ≥ 0.45 | |
| PFA | N | 0.62 | 0.69 | 0.26 | 0.14 |
| Inv | 0.29 | 0.40 | 0.44 | 0.75 | |
| Ev | 0.87 | 0.23 | 0.92 | 0.39 | |
| TS | N | ≥ 0.40 | ≥ 0.58 | ≥ 0.48 | ≥ 0.37 |
| Inv | ≥ 0.10 | ≥ 0.17 | ≥ 0.17 | ≥ 0.62 | |
| Ev | ≥ 0.87 | ≥ 0.89 | ≥ 0.40 | ≥ 0.77 | |
| KA—AP | N | 0.40 | 0.67 | 0.78 | 0.11 |
| Inv | 0.40 | 0.89 | 0.48 | 0.23 | |
| Ev | 0.48 | 0.67 | 0.89 | 0.69 | |
| KA—lateral | N | 0.67 | 0.12 | 0.48 | 0.16 |
| Inv | 0.22 | 0.26 | 0.13 | 0.34 | |
| Ev | 0.99 | 0.33 | 0.67 | 0.42 | |