Mulhern Jennifer L, Protzman Nicole M, Levene Maxwell J, Martin Scott M, Fleming Justin J, Clements J Randolph, Brigido Stephen A
Associate Physician, Martin Foot and Ankle, York, PA.
Research Associate, Coordinated Health, Allentown, PA.
J Foot Ankle Surg. 2016 May-Jun;55(3):572-7. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2015.11.007. Epub 2016 Jan 23.
Tibiotalocalcaneal arthrodesis with intramedullary nailing is traditionally performed with formal preparation of both the subtalar and ankle joints. However, we believe that subtalar joint preparation is not necessary to achieve satisfactory outcomes in patients undergoing tibiotalocalcaneal arthrodesis with a retrograde intramedullary nail. The primary aim of the present retrospective study was to evaluate the outcomes of patients who had undergone tibiotalocalcaneal arthrodesis with an intramedullary nail without formal subtalar joint cartilage resection. A multicenter medical record review was performed to identify consecutive patients. Pain was assessed using a visual analog scale, and osseous union at the tibiotalar joint was defined as bony trabeculation across the arthrodesis site on all 3 radiographic views. Progression of joint deterioration was evaluated across time at the subtalar joint, using a modified grading system developed by Takakura et al. Forty consecutive patients (aged 61.9 ± 12.9 years; 17 men) met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Compared with the pain reported preoperatively (6.4 ± 2.7), a statistically significant decline was seen in the pain experienced after surgery (1.2 ± 1.8; p < .001). The mean time to consolidated arthrodesis at the ankle joint was 3.8 ± 1.5 months. A statistically significant increase in deterioration at the subtalar joint was observed across time [t(36) = -6.200, p < .001]. Compared with previously published data of subtalar joint cartilage resection, the present study has demonstrated a similar decline in pain, with a high rate of union, and also a decrease in operative time when preparation of the subtalar joint was not performed.
传统上,髓内钉固定的胫距跟关节融合术需要对距下关节和踝关节进行正规准备。然而,我们认为,对于接受逆行髓内钉固定的胫距跟关节融合术的患者,距下关节准备并非获得满意疗效所必需。本回顾性研究的主要目的是评估未进行正规距下关节软骨切除、采用髓内钉固定的胫距跟关节融合术患者的疗效。我们进行了一项多中心病历回顾,以确定连续入选的患者。使用视觉模拟量表评估疼痛情况,胫距关节的骨愈合定义为在所有3张X线片上均可见骨小梁穿过融合部位。采用Takakura等人开发的改良分级系统,对距下关节随时间推移的关节退变进展情况进行评估。40例连续患者(年龄61.9±12.9岁;男性17例)符合纳入和排除标准。与术前报告的疼痛程度(6.4±2.7)相比,术后疼痛程度出现了统计学上的显著下降(1.2±1.8;p<0.001)。踝关节融合巩固的平均时间为3.8±1.5个月。随时间推移,观察到距下关节退变有统计学上的显著增加[t(36)=-6. .200,p<0.001]。与先前发表的距下关节软骨切除的数据相比,本研究显示疼痛程度有类似下降、融合率高,并且在未进行距下关节准备时手术时间也有所减少。