Corin Boris, Laumonerie Pierre, Zrounba Victor, Langlais Tristan, De Gauzy Jérôme Sales, Accadbled Franck
Department of Orthopaedics, Hôpital des Enfants, CHU de Toulouse, France.
Department of Orthopaedics, Hôpital Pellegrin, Bordeaux, France.
J Child Orthop. 2022 Apr;16(2):136-140. doi: 10.1177/18632521221087170. Epub 2022 Apr 30.
Calcaneonavicular coalition accounts for more than half of all tarsal coalitions. Resection of calcaneonavicular coalition by an open approach is the standard treatment. Treatment of calcaneonavicular coalition by an arthroscopic approach appears promising. The objective of our study was to compare the clinical outcomes of calcaneonavicular coalition resection by open approach versus arthroscopic approach.
A retrospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate 127 patients who underwent a resection of calcaneonavicular coalition from 2009 to 2017. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether an arthroscopic approach or an open approach was used. Demographics, operative parameters, and clinical outcomes (foot and ankle ability measure score, subjective score, and global ankle estimation) were assessed.
Arthroscopic approach was used for 81 patients and open approach for 46 patients. Treatment with arthroscopic approach resulted in a shorter hospital stay (2.6 ± 0.6 days vs 3.0 ± 0.7; = 0.02) and a longer operative time (24.5 ± 8.1 min vs 20.5 ± 4.2; < 0.01) than with open approach. The foot and ankle ability measure sports subscale scored significantly higher in the arthroscopic approach group (90.9 vs 77.3; = 0.003). Revision rate was significantly higher in the arthroscopic approach group (12 (15%)) versus the open approach group (1 (2%)) ( = 0.024). Persistent symptoms ( = 12) were the main reason for revision.
Arthroscopic treatment of calcaneonavicular coalition is associated with a higher revision rate than the open approach.
Level III-retrospective comparative study.
跟舟联合占所有跗骨联合的一半以上。通过开放入路切除跟舟联合是标准治疗方法。关节镜入路治疗跟舟联合似乎前景广阔。我们研究的目的是比较开放入路与关节镜入路切除跟舟联合的临床效果。
进行一项回顾性队列研究,以评估2009年至2017年接受跟舟联合切除术的127例患者。根据采用关节镜入路还是开放入路将患者分为两组。评估人口统计学、手术参数和临床效果(足踝能力测量评分、主观评分和整体踝关节评估)。
81例患者采用关节镜入路,46例患者采用开放入路。与开放入路相比,关节镜入路治疗导致住院时间更短(2.6±0.6天对3.0±0.7天;P=0.02),手术时间更长(24.5±8.1分钟对20.5±4.2分钟;P<0.01)。关节镜入路组的足踝能力测量运动子量表得分显著更高(90.9对77.3;P=0.003)。关节镜入路组的翻修率显著高于开放入路组(12例(15%)对1例(2%))(P=0.024)。持续症状(n=12)是翻修的主要原因。
与开放入路相比,关节镜治疗跟舟联合的翻修率更高。
Ⅲ级——回顾性比较研究。