Outcomes After Total Ankle Replacement in Association With Ipsilateral Hindfoot Arthrodesis.

BACKGROUND: Ipsilateral hindfoot arthrodesis in combination with total ankle replacement (TAR) may diminish functional outcome and prosthesis survivorship compared to isolated TAR. We compared the outcome of isolated TAR to outcomes of TAR with ipsilateral hindfoot arthrodesis. METHODS: In a consecutive series of 404 primary TARs in 396 patients, 70 patients (17.3%) had a hindfoot fusion before, after, or at the time of TAR; the majority had either an isolated subtalar arthrodesis (n = 43, 62%) or triple arthrodesis (n = 15, 21%). The remaining 334 isolated TARs served as the control group. Mean patient follow-up was 3.2 years (range, 24-72 months). RESULTS: The SF-36 total, AOFAS Hindfoot-Ankle pain subscale, Foot and Ankle Disability Index, and Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment scores were significantly improved from preoperative measures, with no significant differences between the hindfoot arthrodesis and control groups. The AOFAS Hindfoot-Ankle total, function, and alignment scores were significantly improved for both groups, albeit the control group demonstrated significantly higher scores in all 3 scales. Furthermore, the control group demonstrated a significantly greater improvement in VAS pain score compared to the hindfoot arthrodesis group. Walking speed, sit-to-stand time, and 4-square step test time were significantly improved for both groups at each postoperative time point; however, the hindfoot arthrodesis group completed these tests significantly slower than the control group. There was no significant difference in terms of talar component subsidence between the fusion (2.6 mm) and control groups (2.0 mm). The failure rate in the hindfoot fusion group (10.0%) was significantly higher than that in the control group (2.4%; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this study represents the first series evaluating the clinical outcome of TARs performed with and without hindfoot fusion using implants available in the United States. At follow-up of 3.2 years, TAR performed with ipsilateral hindfoot arthrodesis resulted in significant improvements in pain and functional outcome; in contrast to prior studies, however, overall outcome was inferior to that of isolated TAR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prospective comparative series.

Plantar Loading During Cutting While Wearing a Rigid Carbon Fiber Insert.

Context : Stress fractures are one of the most common injuries in sports, accounting for approximately 10% of all overuse injuries. Treatment of fifth metatarsal stress fractures involves both surgical and nonsurgical interventions. Fifth metatarsal stress fractures are difficult to treat because of the risks of delayed union, nonunion, and recurrent injuries. Most of these injuries occur during agility tasks, such as those performed in soccer, basketball, and lacrosse. Objective : To examine the effect of a rigid carbon graphite footplate on plantar loading during 2 agility tasks. Design :  Crossover study. Setting : Laboratory. Patients or Other Participants : A total of 19 recreational male athletes with no history of lower extremity injury in the past 6 months and no previous metatarsal stress fractures were tested. Main Outcome Measure(s) :  Seven 45° side-cut and crossover-cut tasks were completed in a shoe with or without a full-length rigid carbon plate. Testing order between the shoe conditions and the 2 cutting tasks was randomized. Plantar-loading data were recorded using instrumented insoles. Peak pressure, maximum force, force-time integral, and contact area beneath the total foot, the medial and lateral midfoot, and the medial, middle, and lateral forefoot were analyzed. A series of paired t tests was used to examine differences between the footwear conditions (carbon graphite footplate, shod) for both cutting tasks independently (α = .05). Results : During the side-cut task, the footplate increased total foot and lateral midfoot peak pressures while decreasing contact area and lateral midfoot force-time integral. During the crossover-cut task, the footplate increased total foot and lateral midfoot peak pressure and lateral forefoot force-time integral while decreasing total and lateral forefoot contact area. Conclusions : Although a rigid carbon graphite footplate altered some aspects of the plantar- pressure profile during cutting in uninjured participants, it was ineffective in reducing plantar loading beneath the fifth metatarsal.

Comparison of extramedullary versus intramedullary referencing for tibial component alignment in total ankle arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The majority of total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) systems use extramedullary alignment guides for tibial component placement. However, at least 1 system offers intramedullary referencing. In total knee arthroplasty, studies suggest that tibial component placement is more accurate with intramedullary referencing. The purpose of this study was to compare the accuracy of extramedullary referencing with intramedullary referencing for tibial component placement in total ankle arthroplasty. METHODS: The coronal and sagittal tibial component alignment was evaluated on the postoperative weight-bearing anteroposterior (AP) and lateral radiographs of 236 consecutive fixed-bearing TAAs. Radiographs were measured blindly by 2 investigators. The postoperative alignment of the prosthesis was compared with the surgeon's intended alignment in both planes. The accuracy of tibial component alignment was compared between the extramedullary and intramedullary referencing techniques using unpaired t tests. Interrater and intrarater reliabilities were assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). RESULTS: Eighty-three tibial components placed with an extramedullary referencing technique were compared with 153 implants placed with an intramedullary referencing technique. The accuracy of the extramedullary referencing was within a mean of 1.5 ± 1.4 degrees and 4.1 ± 2.9 degrees in the coronal and sagittal planes, respectively. The accuracy of intramedullary referencing was within a mean of 1.4 ± 1.1 degrees and 2.5 ± 1.8 degrees in the coronal and sagittal planes, respectively. There was a significant difference (P < .001) between the 2 techniques with respect to the sagittal plane alignment. Interrater ICCs for coronal and sagittal alignment were high (0.81 and 0.94, respectively). Intrarater ICCs for coronal and sagittal alignment were high for both investigators. CONCLUSIONS: Initial sagittal plane tibial component alignment was notably more accurate when intramedullary referencing was used. Further studies are needed to determine the effect of this difference on clinical outcomes and long-term survivability of the implants. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.