Surgical Outcomes of Articular Surface Crush Injury of Hawkins Ⅲ Talus Neck and Medial Malleolus Fracture

Post-traumatic avascular necrosis of the talus

In this comprehensive case report, we examine a 29-year-old male who suffered a high-energy vehicular accident, resulting in a type III Hawkins fracture of the talus. This specific fracture type is critically associated with a greater than 90% risk of progressing to avascular necrosis (AVN) of the talus, a severe and debilitating condition. Alongside this, the patient sustained fractures of the medial and lateral malleolus. Due to extensive swelling and severe circulatory disorders, an immediate emergency surgical procedure was necessitated, employing nail fixation as a stabilizing intervention. Over the course of 12 months following the surgery, despite routine post-operative imaging including X-rays and computed tomography (CT) scans, the patient continued to experience significant pain and impairment. This condition led to further investigations, culminating in a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) that revealed an area of 19.8∕20.9 mm of AVN on the talus dome's upper-lateral facet. Interestingly, earlier CT scans had indicated multiple osteitic lesions, but these findings lacked a clear clinical correspondence, presenting a diagnostic challenge. To resolve this ambiguity and to definitively distinguish between necrosis and infection, a targeted histopathological analysis was deemed necessary. This analysis was conducted on a bone fragment extracted during a follow-up surgical procedure for nail removal. The results from this analysis present an area of bone and myeloid tissue necrosis unequivocally confirming the presence of AVN, effectively ruling out osteitis as a potential diagnosis. This critical diagnostic clarification allowed for a shift in therapeutic strategy, enabling the initiation of a more focused and potentially curative treatment regimen.

To wedge or not to wedge; A cadaveric comparison study of two medial malleolar osteotomy modalities

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the surface area of the talus accessible with a uniplanar and a biplanar medial malleolus osteotomy. Our secondary purpose study is to quantify the amount of weightbearing area that each osteotomy effects on the tibial articular surface.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eight ankle joint specimens were dissected for this study. The uniplanar osteotomy was performed first. A K-wire marked the limits of access at two different angles: 90° and 30°. The boundaries were marked with a skin marker. Wedges were then created on the tibia plafond, and the osteotomy was converted into a biplanar one. Measurements were repeated again for this osteotomy. The talus, the tibial plafond, and the medial malleolus were then excised. Images were taken and then electronically calibrated for two-dimensional digital measurement of accessible areas. Areas of perpendicular and 30-degree access were recorded for both osteotomies. The articular surface of the tibia was also measured, and an area analysis was performed to calculate the amount of weightbearing cartilage removed by each osteotomy.

RESULTS

Almost the entire sagittal plane was accessible with both osteotomies. At a 30° angle, bone purchase was achieved for 67.7 % of the talar articular surface with the uniplanar osteotomy and for 74.8 % with the biplanar osteotomy. At a 90° angle, uniplanar osteotomy provided access to 32.7 % of the talar articular area, whereas the biplanar osteotomy achieved an average coverage of 52.8 %. The difference was statistically significant. On average, 25.3 % of the weightbearing area of the tibial plafond is affected when a biplanar osteotomy is performed.

CONCLUSION

Medial malleolar osteotomy provides varying degrees of access to the talar dome depending on how it is performed. A wedge-shaped biplanar osteotomy provides greater access and is therefore more suitable for defects located deeper on the talar dome. Despite providing wider access, it results in greater disruption of the weightbearing cartilage of the tibial plafond.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level V.