Posterior Arthroscopic Subtalar Arthrodesis: Clinical and Radiologic Review of 19 Cases

Combined anterior and posterior vs isolated posterior facet fixation for subtalar arthrodesis: A proportional meta-analysis and systematic review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Subtalar arthrodesis (SA) is a common procedure to treat end-stage subtalar osteoarthritis. We set out in order to determine whether a combined direct fixation of both anterior and posterior facets during SA might influence union and complications compared to isolated fixation of the posterior facet. Our hypothesis was that a combined fixation increases the union rate and reduces the complication rate.

METHODS

In this PRISMA-compliant PROSPERO-registered systematic review, we included studies reporting data after SA stabilized with screws in adults. The characteristics of the cohort, study design, surgical details, nonunion and complication rate at the longest follow-up were recorded. The modified Coleman Methodology Score (mCMS) was applied to appraise the quality of studies. Two groups were compared: an ANT/POST group (screws positioned both in the anterior and posterior facet) and an ONLY POST group (isolated posterior facet fixation).

RESULTS

Eighteen series (685 feet: ANT/POST = 96, ONLY POST = 589) were selected. The median follow-up was 28 months (IQR, 12-42). The pooled proportion showed a similar nonunion rate (6% vs 10%; p = 0.46) and complication rate (14% vs 19%, p = 0.47) in the ANT/POST group as compared to the ONLY POST group. The pooled proportion of reoperation was not different either (ANT/POST: 7% vs ONLY POST: 10%, p = 0.37). Kernel regression suggested a correlation between the proportion of open/arthroscopic procedures and the nonunion rate (p = 0.025) with a median nonunion rate at 10.9% and 5.9% for open and arthroscopic procedures, respectively. Mean CMS was 40.4 points (poor quality).

CONCLUSION

This proportional meta-analysis suggested that a combined direct fixation of anterior and posterior facets during subtalar arthrodesis does not significantly influence the risk of nonunion nor affects the risk of complication and reoperation as compared to isolated posterior facet fixation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; review of Level I-IV studies.

A comparison of outcomes of posterior arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis with or without bone graft for treatment of subtalar arthritis

BACKGROUND

It remains unclear whether to perform a bone graft is necessary during posterior arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis. The present research aimed to comparatively analyze the outcomes of arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis through a 3-portal posterior approach with or without bone graft.

METHODS

A total of 93 patients with subtalar arthritis who underwent posterior arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis were retrospectively examined. The patients were divided into two groups according to whether they received bone graft or not. The clinical outcomes were compared for analysis.

RESULTS

Among the 93 patients included, 53 received bone graft and 40 did not. The union rate and time to osseous fusion suggested no significant difference between the two groups. The improvement of clinical outcomes were comparable between the two groups at the final follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

In the present study, bone graft could not effectively reduce the risk of nonunion and improve the outcome.

Inconclusive evidence that arthroscopic techniques yield better outcomes than open techniques for subtalar arthrodesis-A systematic review

IMPORTANCE

Open in situ subtalar arthrodesis (ISTA) has been a standard procedure for treating subtalar arthritis for varied etiologies with good outcomes. There has been a paradigm shift from ISTA to arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis (ASTA) over the past two decades due to increase in number of surgeons performing arthroscopy worldwide. However, there is only limited evidence in the existing literature to substantiate the benefit of this change with regards to patient benefit. To our knowledge, there are also no systematic reviews comparing the results of the two techniques for subtalar arthrodesis (STA).

AIM

Our systematic review aims to determine the superior technique for performing STA by comparing the outcomes, union rates, and complications between open and arthroscopic approach for in situ STA. We hypothesised that both procedures would have similar outcomes, union rates, time to union, and complication rate for in-situ STA.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

Three databases, MEDLINE/PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar, were searched using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria to compare the two procedures. Risk of bias assessment was done using The Risk of Bias in Non-randomised Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for assessing the risk of bias in the included studies. Weighted mean averages were computed for all parameters and tabulated separately for ASTA and ISTA.

FINDINGS

We included a total of 22 studies with a total of 978 (ASTA-310, ISTA-668) patients in the review. The most common indication for both techniques was post traumatic subtalar arthritis due to malunited calcaneal fracture in both groups (54.5%). The American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society score was better in the ASTA group with a weighted average improvement of 43.4, while the weighted average improvement was 31.1 in the ISTA group, respectively. Patients undergoing ASTA had a weighted average union rate of 95.5% (standard deviation [SD]-3.6) with a weighted average time to union of 12.2 weeks (SD-2.4) while the ISTA group reported 90.7% (SD-6) union rate with a weighted average time to union of 15.5 weeks (SD-8.4). The weighted overall average complication rate was 13.1% (SD-8.9) in ASTA group and 20.3% (SD-16.2) in the ISTA group with hardware-related complications being the most common in both the groups.

CONCLUSION

From the existing literature, our review suggests that both ASTA and ISTA techniques are effective procedures for STA. However, there is no conclusive evidence to recommend one technique over another. High quality randomised studies may be further required to clearly define the superiority of one technique over another LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: level III.

How to assess consolidation after foot and ankle arthrodesis with computed tomography. A systematic review

PURPOSES

Many studies have been performed that investigate consolidation after arthrodesis of foot and ankle joints. Consolidation in foot and ankle joints is best assessed by computed tomography (CT). However, no golden-standard methodology exists for radiological consolidation assessment from CT after ankle and foot arthrodesis. The aim of this review is to present an overview of the radiological methodologies for consolidation assessment, outcomes on reliability and validity and to advise which methodology should be used.

METHOD

Scientific databases were systematically searched. Eligible studies were studies that 1) performed foot or ankle arthrodesis, 2) mentioned radiological or CT follow-up in abstract, 3) performed postoperative CT in > 50% of patients. Two authors selected eligible studies and performed a risk of bias assessment with the COSMIN tool.

RESULTS

Risk of bias assessment showed that most studies (80%) were at high risk of bias due to poor methodology. The most popular method for consolidation assessment is by subjectively categorizing consolidation into consolidation groups, with a substantial reliability score. Another popular method is to calculate the fusion ratio and then apply a fusion threshold, to distinguish between fused and non-fused joints. This method had an excellent reliability score. In most studies a fusion threshold of 50% is used. However, four studies in this review showed that a 30% fusion threshold may by more valid.

CONCLUSION

Based on the results of this review we would advise to calculate fusion threshold and apply a 30% fusion threshold to distinguish fused from non-fused foot and ankle joints.

Modified Posterior 2-Portal Technique of Arthroscopic Subtalar Joint Arthrodesis: Improved Pain and Functional Outcome at Mean 15 Months Follow-up-A Case Series

INTRODUCTION

Posterior arthroscopic subtalar joint arthrodesis (PASTA) via a posterior 2-portal technique has been described. We modified the surgical technique of creating the portals in the plane of the posterior facet (under fluoroscopy guidance) to enhance the ease of access to the joint, easier and complete removal of articular cartilage along with maintaining the heel height.

METHODS

Patients of post-traumatic subtalar joint arthritis, treated by PASTA during 2016 till 2019 were included in the study. Exclusion criteria: significant height collapse of calcaneum, lateral blow out or heel widening. The confirmation of subtalar joint as the source of pain was done by injection of local anaesthetic inside the joint under the image intensifier, bringing immediate pain relief. The primary outcome variables assessed were the pain and functional scores, assessed using visual analogue scale and AOFAS (American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society) score, respectively.

RESULTS

The total of 16 patients (7 males, 9 females) was included. The average age was 40.68 years (23-58 years). The underlying pathology in all patients was post-traumatic subtalar arthritis secondary to calcaneus fracture malunion in 8 patients (50%), talus fracture malunion in 4 (25%) and ligament injury in 2 patients (12.5%). No bone grafting was done. The mean duration of follow-up was 15.6 months (9-24 months). There was a statistically significant improvement (p < 0.001) in mean VAS score at follow up (2; range 0-4) as compared to the mean preoperative score (7; range 6-9). The AOFAS score also improved significantly (p < 0.001) at the follow up (mean 79; range 68-89) as compared to the preoperative score (mean 18; range 10-25).

CONCLUSION

The posterior arthroscopic fusion of subtalar joint gives good results in terms of pain relief and functional scores when done for carefully selected patients of subtalar joint arthritis. Our slight modification of the original technique improves the ease of removing cartilage from subtalar joint with minimal height loss; thus, precluding any need for bone graft. It also makes the instrument movement easier inside the joint.

Arthroscopic Subtalar Joint Arthrodesis: Topical Review

BACKGROUND

Advances in foot and ankle arthroscopy over the last 2 decades have allowed for subtalar joint arthrodesis to be performed arthroscopically. The potential advantages of the arthroscopic technique include higher fusion rates, lower complications, reduced perioperative morbidity, and accelerated rehabilitation. Arthroscopic arthrodesis may, however, not be appropriate in the setting of complex deformity correction or the need for other open procedures.

METHODS

Surgical techniques of arthroscopic subtalar joint arthrodesis are described. Outcomes and complications associated with these procedures are presented, based on a comprehensive literature review. Thirteen Level IV studies of moderate quality were included.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Excellent arthrodesis union rates were achieved (average 96%, range 86%-100%), at a weighted average union time of 8.8 weeks (95% confidence interval 7.9-9.7). The overall complication rate was 21% (87/415 feet; range 10%-36.4%). Metal irritation was the most common complication (11.2%), followed by nerve injury (4.2%) and infection (0.9%). Similar fusion rates have been reported when comparing arthroscopic and open arthrodesis. Complication rates are also similar, excerpt for infection, which may be lower with arthroscopy. Three different approaches were used to access the subtalar joint with similar union and complication rates. There was no evidence that the use of bone graft or more than 1 screw improved outcomes. The superiority of arthroscopic subtalar fusion over open techniques cannot be demonstrated by the available studies.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, case series.

Outcomes of Posterior Arthroscopic Subtalar Arthrodesis for Medial Facet Talocalcaneal Coalition

BACKGROUND

Medial facet talocalcaneal coalition can be a painful condition. This study aimed to determine clinical and radiographic outcomes of posterior arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis (PASTA) for adult patients presenting with symptomatic medial facet talocalcaneal coalition and normal hindfoot alignment, with a minimal follow-up of 18 months.

METHODS

Between June 2017 and July 2019, this procedure was performed on 8 feet (8 patients; mean age, 55 [42-70] years; mean BMI, 29.8 [24.4-45.0] kg/m²). Clinical assessment was performed using Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS-P), Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) and the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). Patient satisfaction was assessed at the last available follow-up as "very satisfied", "satisfied" or "unsatisfied". Radiographic analysis was performed using plain radiography, computed tomography (CT) scan and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The primary outcome was to determine both clinical and radiographic outcomes.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up was 25.1 (18.2-34.2) months. The authors found statistically significant improvement on all clinical scores (VASP-P, FAOS and SF-36). They registered 6 "very satisfied" patients, 2 "satisfied" patients and no "unsatisfied" patient. Fusion of the subtalar joint was observed in all patients by 12 weeks and in 5 of them as soon as 8 weeks postoperatively (mean, 9.5 [8-12] weeks). There were no cases of delayed fusion or nonunion of the subtalar joint, superficial or deep infection, neurovascular damage, thromboembolic event, screw breakage, need for hardware removal or revision surgery.

CONCLUSION

This study found that PASTA is a safe and reliable technique for adult patients presenting with symptomatic medial facet talocalcaneal coalition and normal hindfoot alignment, demonstrating and maintaining clinical improvement at an average follow-up of 2 years.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, case series.

Outcomes and Complications of Open vs Posterior Arthroscopic Subtalar Arthrodesis: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Open subtalar arthrodesis is the standard treatment for subtalar arthritis. Posterior arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis (PASTA) has recently gained increasing popularity due to a shorter recovery time and better cosmesis. However, studies comparing outcomes and complications between these 2 techniques are limited.

METHODS

In total, 56 patients with subtalar joint arthritis were prospectively randomized to 2 parallel groups to receive either PASTA (n = 28 patients) or open subtalar arthrodesis (n = 28 patients). The minimum follow-up period was 12 months. Primary outcome was union rate confirmed on postoperative computed tomography (CT) scan. Secondary outcomes were union time; visual analog scale (VAS), Short Form-36 (SF-36), and Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) scores; tourniquet time; and complications.

RESULTS

Union time (9.4 vs 12.8 weeks) and recovery time (time to return to activities of daily living [8.4 vs 10.8 weeks], work [10.6 vs 12.9 weeks], and sports [24.9 vs 32.7 weeks]) were significantly shorter with PASTA than with the open technique (P < .05 all). Both techniques led to significant improvements in all functional outcomes (FAAM, SF-36, and VAS scores; P < .01 all); however, there was no significant difference between the techniques in these outcomes (P > .05 all). Other outcomes, including tourniquet time (55.8 vs 67.2 min), union rate (96.3% vs 100%), and complication rate, were not significantly different between the techniques.

CONCLUSION

Both open and PASTA techniques led to significant improvements in pain and function in patients with isolated subtalar joint arthritis. Although short-term functional outcomes and complication rates were not significantly different between the techniques, the PASTA technique was better at shortening the union and recovery times.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I, prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial.

Arthroscopic Subtalar Arthrodesis as a Treatment Strategy for Subtalar Arthritis: A Systematic Review

Arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis is a relatively new technique which is increasingly being used by foot and ankle surgeons as an alternative to open surgery. However, there is still a lack of consensus with respect to the efficacy of the procedure. The purpose of this review was to ascertain (1) whether arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis improves the functional outcome of treated patients and (2) how do the 2 techniques of subtalar arthroscopy (posterior and lateral) compare with each other. MEDLINE and Cochrane Library databases were accessed by 2 independent reviewers. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were predefined. National Institute of Health risk of bias assessment tool was used to determine the methodological quality of the included studies. A total of ten studies with 234 patients (240 feet) were included. The most common indication for arthroscopic subtalar fusion was posttraumatic subtalar arthritis. Weighted pre- and postoperative American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society scores were 47 and 80.7, respectively. Average time to fusion was 10.2 weeks and weighted mean fusion rate was 95%. Pain secondary to prominent hardware and nonunion were the most common complications. Although improvement in functional scores was higher and complication rate lower with the posterior group, a better fusion rate was seen with the lateral approach. Arthroscopic fusion techniques have shown to be an effective alternative to open surgery. While there was a trend for better functional outcome with the posterior approach, randomized control trials comparing the 2 techniques are needed to better assess their respective outcomes.

Isolated Arthroscopic-Assisted Subtalar Fusion: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The subtalar joint has a complex anatomic function that includes inversion and eversion of the hindfoot, assisting in walking on uneven surfaces. Arthritis is the most common pathological condition affecting this joint and can require fusion. The surgery can be performed open or with arthroscopic assistance. This systematic review assesses articles written on the safety and efficacy of isolated arthroscopic subtalar fusion.

METHODS

Using MEDLINE and Embase, we systematically reviewed articles published before May 21, 2020.

RESULTS

Of 395 articles, 17 on a total of 395 patients (409 operations) were included in the review. The average duration of follow-up was 40.0 months (range, 3 to 105 months). Radiographic evidence of union was reported for 95.8% of cases at an average of 11.9 weeks (range, 6 to 56 weeks) postoperatively. Delayed union was reported in 1.0% of patients and nonunion, in 4.3% of patients. In the articles reporting patient satisfaction, including pain relief, 95.4% of patients had positive outcomes. Postoperative complications were reported in 64 patients (16.2%), including 37 (9.4%) with symptomatic implants, 11 (2.8%) with dysesthesia or neuropathic pain, and 3 (0.8%) with postoperative infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic subtalar fusion is a safe and effective alternative to open subtalar arthrodesis, with high patient satisfaction rates, high union rates at similar follow-up intervals, and low complication rates. The aim of future research should be to determine the ideal cases for this approach as well as the most efficient arthroscopic surgical technique and postoperative rehabilitation to optimize function and union as seen on radiographs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Comparison of different bone graft with arthroscopy-assisted arthrodesis for the treatment of traumatic arthritis of the subtalar joint

AIM OF THE STUDY

To compare the clinical outcomes of traumatic arthritis of the subtalar joint treated by arthroscopy-assisted arthrodesis with autologous bone graft, allogenous bone graft, artifical bone graft, and no bone graft .

METHODS

Sixty-two patients (64 ft) with traumatic arthritis of subtalar joint were randomly divided into four groups. The cases treated with arthroscopy-assisted arthrodesis were analyzed retrospectively. The mean follow-up time was about 22 months (18-28 months) in each group. Clinical outcomes were assessed by the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and radiographic examination. The post-operative complications in each group were recorded respectively.

RESULTS

All operations were successful, without incision complications. The subtalar joint obtained full osseous fusion in each group. The average time of osseous fusion was about 12 weeks. There was no significant difference in the fusion time with each group (P = 0.991). The AOFAS and VAS scores in each group were improved significantly in the pre-operative vs post-operative evaluation (all P < 0.01). The average operation time in autologous bone graft group was 74.56 ± 11.45 min which significantly different from that of other groups(P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Similar clinical outcomes were achieved among each type of bone graft. Therefore, which types of bone graft or not may be not the most important for arthroscopy-assisted subtalar arthrodesis.

How many screws are necessary for subtalar fusion? A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Biomechanical studies have shown a higher compressive force and higher torsional stiffness for fixation with three screws compared to two screws. However, clinical data to compare these fixation techniques is still lacking.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 113 patients was performed, who underwent isolated subtalar fusion between January 2006 and April 2018.

RESULTS

Revision arthrodesis was required in 8% (n=6/36) for 3-screw-fixation and 38% (n=35/77) for 2-screw-fixation. For 3-screw-fixation, non-union, was observed in 14% (n=5/36) compared to 35% (n=27/77) in 2-screw fixation. Non-union (p=.025) and revision arthrodesis (p=.034) were significantly more frequent in patients with 2 screws. A body mass index ≥30kg/m² (p=.04, OR=2.6,95%CI:1.1-6.3), prior ankle-fusion (p=.017,OR=4.4,95%CI:1.3-14.5) and diabetes mellitus (p=.04,OR=4.9,95%CI:1.1-17.8) were associated with a higher rate of revision arthrodesis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that successful subtalar fusion is more reliably achieved with use of three screws. However, future prospective studies will be necessary to further specify this recommendation.

Do Patient Positioning and Portal Placement for Arthroscopic Subtalar Arthrodesis Matter?

Background

Arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis was first described over 2 decades ago and originally performed in the lateral decubitus or supine position using anterolateral and posterolateral portals situated about the fibula. More recently, several authors have advocated for prone positioning utilizing posteromedial and posterolateral portals with an optional accessory lateral portal. To date, a comparison of these techniques has been limited.

Purpose

To determine the effect of patient positioning and portal placement on complication rates after arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis.

Study Design

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods

A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Patients were placed into 1 of 3 groups: the lateral group if they were positioned lateral or supine with lateral-based portals; the 2-portal prone group if they were positioned prone with posteromedial and posterolateral portals; or the 3-portal prone group if posteromedial, posterolateral, and accessory lateral portals were utilized in the prone position. Inverse variance-weighted fixed-effects models were used to evaluate pooled estimates.

Results

A total of 20 studies examining 484 feet in 468 patients with a mean follow-up of 36.1 months were included for analysis. Overall, 8 studies examined patients in the prone position with 2 posterior portals (n = 111; 22.9%), 7 articles evaluated lateral portals (n = 182; 37.6%), and 5 studies examined patients in the prone position with 3 portals (n = 191; 39.5%). The total complication rate was similar (P = .620) between the 2-portal prone (18.9%), 3-portal prone (17.8%), and lateral (17.6%) groups. There was no difference observed in the rate of complications secondary to portal placement (P ≥ .334), rate of painful hardware (P ≥ .497), and rate of repeat surgery (P ≥ .304). The 2-portal prone group had a significantly higher rate of nonunion than the lateral group (8.1% vs 1.1%, respectively; P = .020) but not the 3-portal prone group (5.8%; P = .198).

Conclusion

The current study demonstrated a higher rate of nonunion following arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis with prone patient positioning using posteromedial and posterolateral portals without an accessory lateral portal.

Subtalar Arthroscopic Fusion

Arthroscopic subtalar fusion is an excellent approach to subtalar pathologic condition where conservative treatment has failed and a fusion has been indicated. Formal contraindications include excessive malalignment and bone loss. The posterior arthroscopic approach is analyzed in this article, including indications, surgical technique, surgical tips, and complications. Excellent results can be expected, including a shorter time to fusion, and faster rehabilitation, including activities of daily living and sports.