Open Ankle Arthrodesis: Transfibular Approach

Does Concurrent Distal Tibiofibular Joint Arthrodesis Affect the Nonunion and Complication Rates of Tibiotalar Arthrodesis?

Tibiotalar arthrodesis successfully treats ankle arthritis but carries risk of nonunion. It is unclear whether concurrent distal tibiofibular arthrodesis affects tibiotalar nonunion rate. The purpose of this study is to compare tibiotalar nonunion and complication rates in patients with versus without a distal tibiofibular arthrodesis. This is a retrospective review of 516 consecutive ankle arthrodesis performed between March 2002 and May 2016. A total of 319 ankles (312 patients) underwent primary, open tibiotalar arthrodesis (227 with distal tibiofibular arthrodesis, 92 without). Primary outcome measure was nonunion rate. Secondary outcome measures were time to tibiotalar union, rate of development of post-operative deep vein thrombosis (DVT)/pulmonary embolism (PE), rate of deep wound complications, and rate of return to operating room (OR). No differences in nonunion rates were observed in both cohorts of patients with versus without distal tibiofibular arthrodesis: 17/227 (7.5%) versus 11/92 (12%) (p = 0.2), respectively, odds ratio was 0.74, 95% CI: 0.29~2.08 (p = 0.55). There was no difference in deep wound complications (5.3% versus 10.9%, p = 0.42), time to union (3.7 months versus 4.1 months, p = 0.72), or rate of development of DVT/PE (5.2% versus 2.2%, p = 0.18) between patients with and without distal tibiofibular arthrodesis, respectively. This is the first study directly comparing nonunion and complication rates in primary, open ankle arthrodesis with and without distal tibiofibular arthrodesis. Inclusion of the distal fibular joint with the tibiotalar fusion was not associated with a change in tibiotalar nonunion rate, time to union, wound complications, or postoperative DVT/PE.

Open Ankle Arthrodesis: a Systematic Review of Approaches and Fixation Methods

BACKGROUND

Open ankle arthrodesis (OAA) remains the most widely used operation in end-stage ankle osteoarthritis. However, there is a large variation in terms of approach and fixation methods. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effect of different approaches and fixation methods on the union rate, complication rate and functional outcome in OAA.

METHODS

A search of the online databases PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library was performed to identify patients who underwent OAA with screw- and/or plate-fixation.

RESULTS

We identified 38 studies, including 1250 patients (1290 ankles). The union rate was 98% (95% CI 0.95-0.99) for the anterior, 96% (95% CI 0.92-0.98) for the lateral and 96% (95% CI 0.68-1.00) for the combined medial/lateral approach. Screw-fixation achieved an overall union rate of 96% (95% CI 0.93-0.98) and plate-fixation 99% (95% CI 0.96-0.99). The overall complication rate was 14%, 16% and 31% for the anterior, lateral and combined medial/lateral approaches respectively. It stood at 18% for screw-fixation and 9% for plate-fixation. The infection rate was 4%, 6% and 8% for the anterior, lateral and combined approaches respectively. Screw-fixation had an infection rate of 6% and plate-fixation 3%. The postoperative AOFAS scores were 76.8, 76.5 and 67.6 for the anterior, lateral and combined approaches respectively and 74.9 for screw- compared to 78.5 for plate-fixation. These differences did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

This study, the first of its kind, found little difference in terms of results between approach and fixation method used in OAA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IIa.