Lewis John S, Adams Samuel B, Queen Robin M, DeOrio James K, Nunley James A, Easley Mark E
1 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA.
Foot Ankle Int. 2014 Jun;35(6):535-542. doi: 10.1177/1071100714528495.
Ipsilateral hindfoot arthrodesis in combination with total ankle replacement (TAR) may diminish functional outcome and prosthesis survivorship compared to isolated TAR. We compared the outcome of isolated TAR to outcomes of TAR with ipsilateral hindfoot arthrodesis.
In a consecutive series of 404 primary TARs in 396 patients, 70 patients (17.3%) had a hindfoot fusion before, after, or at the time of TAR; the majority had either an isolated subtalar arthrodesis (n = 43, 62%) or triple arthrodesis (n = 15, 21%). The remaining 334 isolated TARs served as the control group. Mean patient follow-up was 3.2 years (range, 24-72 months).
The SF-36 total, AOFAS Hindfoot-Ankle pain subscale, Foot and Ankle Disability Index, and Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment scores were significantly improved from preoperative measures, with no significant differences between the hindfoot arthrodesis and control groups. The AOFAS Hindfoot-Ankle total, function, and alignment scores were significantly improved for both groups, albeit the control group demonstrated significantly higher scores in all 3 scales. Furthermore, the control group demonstrated a significantly greater improvement in VAS pain score compared to the hindfoot arthrodesis group. Walking speed, sit-to-stand time, and 4-square step test time were significantly improved for both groups at each postoperative time point; however, the hindfoot arthrodesis group completed these tests significantly slower than the control group. There was no significant difference in terms of talar component subsidence between the fusion (2.6 mm) and control groups (2.0 mm). The failure rate in the hindfoot fusion group (10.0%) was significantly higher than that in the control group (2.4%; p < 0.05).
To our knowledge, this study represents the first series evaluating the clinical outcome of TARs performed with and without hindfoot fusion using implants available in the United States. At follow-up of 3.2 years, TAR performed with ipsilateral hindfoot arthrodesis resulted in significant improvements in pain and functional outcome; in contrast to prior studies, however, overall outcome was inferior to that of isolated TAR.
Level II, prospective comparative series.
与单纯全踝关节置换术(TAR)相比,同侧后足关节融合术联合TAR可能会降低功能结局和假体生存率。我们比较了单纯TAR与TAR联合同侧后足关节融合术的结局。
在396例患者连续进行的404例初次TAR中,70例患者(17.3%)在TAR之前、之后或同时进行了后足融合术;大多数患者进行的是单纯距下关节融合术(n = 43,62%)或三关节融合术(n = 15,21%)。其余334例单纯TAR作为对照组。患者平均随访3.2年(范围24 - 72个月)。
SF - 36总分、美国足踝外科协会(AOFAS)后足 - 踝关节疼痛子量表、足踝残疾指数和简短肌肉骨骼功能评估评分较术前均有显著改善,后足融合术组与对照组之间无显著差异。两组的AOFAS后足 - 踝关节总分、功能和对线评分均有显著改善,尽管对照组在所有三个量表上的评分均显著更高。此外,与后足融合术组相比,对照组的视觉模拟评分(VAS)疼痛评分改善更为显著。两组在每个术后时间点的步行速度、从坐到站时间和四方步试验时间均有显著改善;然而,后足融合术组完成这些测试的速度明显慢于对照组。融合术组(2.6 mm)与对照组(2.0 mm)的距骨组件下沉情况无显著差异。后足融合术组的失败率(10.0%)显著高于对照组(2.4%;p < 0.05)。
据我们所知,本研究是第一项使用美国现有的植入物评估有无后足融合术的TAR临床结局的系列研究。在3.2年的随访中,TAR联合同侧后足关节融合术在疼痛和功能结局方面有显著改善;然而,与先前的研究相比,总体结局不如单纯TAR。
II级,前瞻性比较系列研究。