Posteromedial Approach for Talar Body Fractures: Avoiding the Medial Malleolar Osteotomy

Talar Dome Access Through Posteromedial Surgical Intervals for Fracture Care

BACKGROUND

Posterior talar body fractures are rare injuries without a consensus surgical approach. This study evaluates the accessible area of the talar dome through 2 posteromedial approach intervals (posteromedial [PM] and modified posteromedial [mPM]) both with and without distraction.

METHODS

Ten male cadaveric legs (5 matched pairs) were included. A PM approach, between flexor hallucis longus (FHL) and the tibial neurovascular bundle, and an mPM approach, between FHL and Achilles tendon, was performed on each pair. In total, 4 mm of distraction across the tibiotalar joint was applied with the foot held in neutral position. Accessible dome surface area (DSA) was outlined by drilling with a 1.6-mm Kirschner wire with and without distraction. Specimens were explanted and analyzed by micro-computed tomography with 3-dimensional reconstruction. Primary outcomes were total accessible DSA and sagittal plane access at predetermined intervals.

RESULTS

The PM approach allowed access to 19.1% of the talar DSA without distraction and 33.1% of the talar dome with distraction (P < .001). The mPM approach provided access to 20.4% and 35.6% of the talar DSA without and with distraction (P < .001). Both approaches demonstrated similar sagittal plane access at all intervals except the lateral border of the talus, where the mPM approach provided greater access both without distraction (20.5% vs 4.38%, P = .002) and with distraction (34.3% vs 17.8%, P = .02).

CONCLUSION

The mPM approach, using an interval between FHL and Achilles tendon, provides similar access to the posterior surface of talar dome and better sagittal plane access to the most lateral portion of the dome. The mPM interval provides the advantage of avoiding direct dissection of the tibial nerve or posterior tibial artery. Using an external fixator for distraction can improve talar dome visualization substantially.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level V, Cadaveric Study.

Mapping of Posterior Talar Dome Access Through Posteromedial Versus Posterolateral Approaches

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the accessible area of the talar dome through 2 standard posterior approaches [posteromedial (PM) and posterolateral (PL)] with and without distraction.

METHODS

A standard PM or PL approach was performed with and without external fixator distraction on 12 through-knee cadaveric legs (6 matched pairs). The accessible area of the talar dome was outlined and imaged in a microcomputed tomography scanner to achieve 3D reconstructions of the accessible surface area. The study outcomes were accessible surface area of the talar dome in (1) total surface area and (2) sagittal plane distance of the talar dome at predetermined intervals.

RESULTS

The PM approach provided significantly more access to the talar dome than did the PL approach both with and without distraction (P < 0.001). The PM approach allowed access to 15.8% (SD = 4.7) of the talar dome without distraction and 26.4% (SD = 8.0, P < 0.001) of the talar dome with distraction. The PL approach provided access to 6.69% (SD = 2.69, P = 0.006 compared with PM) and 14.6% (SD = 6.24, P = 0.006 compared with PM) of the talar dome surface area without and with distraction. At the difficult to access posterocentral region (L50) of the talus, the PM approach without and with distraction allowed 26.7% (SD = 4.1) and 38.6% (SD = 5.6, P < 0.001) sagittal plane access compared with 18.7% (SD = 5.61, P = 0.03) and 27.5% (SD = 7.11, P = 0.003) through a PL approach.

CONCLUSION

The PM approach provides greater access to the posterocentral and PM talus. Using an external fixator for distraction can improve intraoperative visualization by at least 40%. This study provides a roadmap that can help guide talar dome surgical access for treatment of posterior talus fractures and help determine when an approach that includes an osteotomy can be avoided.

Current Concepts in Talar Neck Fracture Management

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

Talar neck fractures are a rare but potentially devastating injury, which require a comprehensive understanding of the unique osteology, vasculature, and surrounding anatomy to recognize pathology and treat correctly. The purpose of this article is to describe both classic and current literature to better understand the evolution of talar neck fracture management.

RECENT FINDINGS

Urgent reduction of displaced fractures and dislocations remains the standard of care to protect the soft tissue envelope and neurovascular structures. Delayed definitive fixation has proven to be safe. CT is the imaging modality of choice to fully identify the fracture pattern and associated injuries. Anatomic reduction and restoration of the peritalar articular surfaces are the pillars of talar neck fracture treatment. Dual incision approach with plate and screw fixation has become the modern surgical strategy of choice to accomplish these goals. Although complications such as osteonecrosis (ON) and posttraumatic arthritis (PTA) can still occur at high rates, treatment should be dictated by patient symptoms. Talar neck fractures pose treatment challenges with both initial injury and potential sequelae. Future research will determine whether modern treatment algorithms will decrease complication rate and improve patient outcome.