-
The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery Jun 2022This study compares the outcomes of patients undergoing total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) and tibiotalar fusion (ankle arthrodesis) in patients with end-stage... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This study compares the outcomes of patients undergoing total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) and tibiotalar fusion (ankle arthrodesis) in patients with end-stage osteoarthritis. The primary outcome assessed was Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMS); secondary outcomes included the incidence of revision, re-operation, and complications.
METHODS
A systematic review of studies examining the outcomes of patients undergoing TAA and/or tibiotalar fusion from 2006 to 2020 was conducted. Individual cohort studies and randomized control trials were included. Outcomes were assessed at two and five years.
RESULTS
21 studies were included: 16 arthroplasty (2,016 patients) and 5 arthrodesis (256 patients) studies. No significant difference in PROMS was evident two years post-surgery - American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) scores were 78.8 (95% CI-confidence interval: 76.6-80.8; n=1548) and 80.8 (95% CI: 80.1-81.5; n=206 patients) for the arthroplasty and arthrodesis groups respectively. Two years post-surgery the revision rates for the arthroplasty and arthrodesis groups were similar - 3.5% (n=9) and 3.7% (n=61) respectively (OR-odds ratio: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.51-2.13); however, the re-operation rate was 2.5 times higher for the arthroplasty group (12.2%) in comparison to the arthrodesis group (5.1%) (OR: 2.57; 95% CI: 1.43-4.62). Documented complications in the arthroplasty group were half those documented in the arthrodesis group two years post-surgery (OR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.37-0.77). No arthrodesis studies were found which contained mean 5-year follow-up data within the study period.
CONCLUSION
Despite recent developments in TAA design, we found no clear evidence as to their superiority over ankle arthrodesis when considering patient outcomes two years postoperatively. However, this conclusion could be debatable in some types of patients such as diabetic patients, posttraumatic patients and patients with stiff hindfoot and midfoot.
PubMed: 35928907
DOI: 10.22038/ABJS.2021.55790.2778 -
Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics Apr 2024Tibiocalcaneal arthrodesis (TCA) can be achieved by internal fixation (intramedullary nail or plate), external fixation, or a combination. Evidence for the optimal...
BACKGROUND
Tibiocalcaneal arthrodesis (TCA) can be achieved by internal fixation (intramedullary nail or plate), external fixation, or a combination. Evidence for the optimal approach is limited. This systematic review examines the outcomes of these different approaches to guide surgical management.
METHODS
A MEDLINE and Oxford SOLO search was performed using "tibiocalcaneal," "ankle," "fusion OR arthrodesis." The primary outcome was union. Secondary outcomes included rates of postoperative complications, weightbearing status, rates of revision surgery, and PROMs. We included any studies with follow-up greater than 6 months that contained our primary outcome and at least 1 secondary outcome.
RESULTS
The initial search yielded 164 articles, of which 9 studies totaling 53 cases met the criteria. The majority of articles were excluded because they were nonsurgical studies, or were not about isolated TCA but were for tibiotalocalcaneal arthrodesis, more complex reconstructions (eg, Charcot), case reports, and/or did not include the predetermined outcome measures.TCA union rate was 86.2% following external fixation, 82.4% for intramedullary nail fixation, and 83.3% for plate fixation. One patient underwent a hybrid of external and internal fixation, and the outcome was nonunion. The rate of complications following TCA was 69.8%.
CONCLUSION
There is limited evidence on the best operative approach for isolated tibiocalcaneal arthrodesis. Both external and internal fixation methods had comparable union rates. External fixation had frequent complications and a more challenging postoperative protocol. Novel techniques such as 3D-printed cages and talus replacement may become a promising alternative but require further investigation.
PubMed: 38726323
DOI: 10.1177/24730114241247547 -
Hand (New York, N.Y.) Mar 2023The purpose of this systematic review is to identify whether non-salvage procedures can provide satisfactory and acceptable outcomes in Lichtman stage IV disease. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this systematic review is to identify whether non-salvage procedures can provide satisfactory and acceptable outcomes in Lichtman stage IV disease.
METHODS
The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched for English publications between 1989 and 2019 that reported stage IV-specific primary treatment outcomes. Revisions and skeletally immature patients were excluded. Data extracted were patient demographics, pain scores, range of motion (ROM), grip strength, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The results were pooled into 3 categories: conservative management, non-salvage, and salvage procedures.
RESULTS
Data from 24 studies (n = 114 patients) were extracted. Compared with conservative management and non-salvage treatment (joint-leveling radial osteotomies, lunate reconstruction), salvage procedures (intercarpal and radiocarpal arthrodesis, proximal row carpectomy, total wrist arthroplasty) showed significantly decreased ROM in flexion-extension arc of motion (89° vs 95° vs 73°, respectively, = .0001) and no significant differences in grip strength as a percentage of the contralateral side (83% vs 86% vs 79%, respectively, = .28). All reported treatments provided pain relief, ability to return to previous occupations, and variable PROMs.
CONCLUSIONS
In young, active, and labor-intensive patients, motion-preserving, non-salvage options may be worth trialing as they do not preclude future salvage options.
Topics: Humans; Wrist Joint; Lunate Bone; Osteonecrosis; Treatment Outcome; Pain
PubMed: 35043699
DOI: 10.1177/15589447211066613 -
Hand (New York, N.Y.) Sep 2023Ulnar-sided wrist pain can be attributed to various bony and ligamentous structures. The purpose of this review is to compare outcomes following surgical interventions... (Review)
Review
Ulnar-sided wrist pain can be attributed to various bony and ligamentous structures. The purpose of this review is to compare outcomes following surgical interventions for isolated lunotriquetral (LT) interosseous ligament injuries in adults. We assessed 202 procedures from 9 retrospective case series studies of low to moderate quality based on the Structured Effectiveness Quality Evaluation Scale. The comparative outcomes (ie, range of motion, pain, strength, quality of life, complications, return to work, and patient satisfaction) were aggregated and categorized under arthrodesis, capsulodesis, ligament repairs and reconstruction, and ulna shortening osteotomy procedures. Although the comparison of outcomes was largely inconclusive due to the heterogeneity and the omission of preoperative characteristic data, we did observe higher complications and reoperation rates post LT arthrodesis. It is recommended that all outcomes be standardized and presented uniformly with best practices developed to better characterize the injury's severity and integrity in future studies.
PubMed: 37771154
DOI: 10.1177/15589447231198268 -
World Neurosurgery Feb 2023This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to investigate evidence for the comparison of lumbar dynamic stabilization device Coflex (Surgalign, Deerfield,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to investigate evidence for the comparison of lumbar dynamic stabilization device Coflex (Surgalign, Deerfield, IL) with posterior lumbar fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis).
METHODS
Relational databases were searched to October 2022. The main outcome measures included operation time, Japanese Orthopedic Association score (JOA), visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry disability index (ODI), total complications, and adjacent segment degeneration (ASD). Statistical analysis was performed with Review Manager 5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration).
RESULTS
A total of 26 studies were included. The main results of this meta-analysis showed lumbar dynamic stabilization device Coflex had shorter operation time (mean difference [MD] -50.77 min, 95% CI -57.24 to -44.30, P < 0.00001), less intraoperative blood loss (MD -122.21 mL, 95% CI -129.68 to -94.74, P < 0.00001), and shorter hospital stays (MD -3.21 days, 95% CI -4.04 to -2.37, P < 0.00001). What's more, the JOA score and ODI score were higher in the Coflex group during early follow-up. Yet, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups with the extension of follow-up time. Moreover, the Coflex group had a lower VAS score than fusion treatment (P < 0.00001). Finally, the Coflex group had lower total complications rate (P = 0.03), lower ASD rate (P = 0.001), and higher range of motion (P < 0.00001), but there was no significant difference in reoperation rate and internal fixation problems rate.
CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence suggests that lumbar dynamic stabilization device Coflex is superior to posterior lumbar fusion in early follow-up. However, considering that the dynamic stabilization device group also has its limitations, these findings need to be further verified by multicenter, double-blind, and large-sample randomized controlled trials.
Topics: Humans; Spinal Stenosis; Treatment Outcome; Spinal Fusion; Decompression, Surgical; Lumbar Vertebrae; Retrospective Studies; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Multicenter Studies as Topic
PubMed: 36481444
DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2022.11.141 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Feb 2024: Ankle arthroscopy is indicated for both diagnosis and treatment of a large spectrum of common ankle disorders. It has certain advantages over the open procedure;... (Review)
Review
: Ankle arthroscopy is indicated for both diagnosis and treatment of a large spectrum of common ankle disorders. It has certain advantages over the open procedure; however, it is important to recognize that there are some complications associated with it. Infections after this procedure are quite uncommon, with an overall estimated incidence of 2%. Given the low incidence of infections after ankle arthroscopy, not a great deal of literature on the topic has been published. The present review aims to provide an overview of the incidence, diagnosis, and treatment of infections after ankle arthroscopy. : A systematic review of the literature indexed in the PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library databases using search term "ankle arthroscopy infections" was performed in November 2023. No restrictions were applied concerning the date of publication. The Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) were followed. Among all surgical operations for the treatment of ankle and foot pathologies, we included articles with a described superficial or deep infection after ankle arthroscopy. The search resulted in 201 studies. Only 21 studies met our inclusion criteria, and they were included in this systematic review. We evaluated 1706 patients who underwent 1720 arthroscopic tibiotalar procedures at an average age of 42 years old. Out of the 1720 procedures, 41 (2%) were complicated by infection. We divided infectious complications into superficial (68%; 28/41) and deep (32%; 13/41) infections. The most common pathogen isolated was Staphylococcus aureus. Arthroscopic arthrodesis was found to be the most affected by deep infections. : Infection after ankle arthroscopy is an uncommon complication. Superficial infections were successfully treated with antibiotics, while surgical debridement, arthroscopic drainage, and intravenous antibiotics were necessary in cases of deep infections. Considering the amount of information on pathogens associated with knee and shoulder infections, there is still a lack of literature on pathogens associated with ankle infections, which makes their management difficulty.
PubMed: 38398296
DOI: 10.3390/jcm13040983 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine May 2023Although open surgery is the conventional option for ankle arthritis, there are some reports in the literature regarding the use of the arthroscopy procedure with... (Review)
Review
Although open surgery is the conventional option for ankle arthritis, there are some reports in the literature regarding the use of the arthroscopy procedure with outstanding results. The primary purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to analyze the effect of the surgery technique (open-ankle arthrodesis vs. arthroscopy) in patients with ankle osteoarthritis. Three electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus) were searched until 10 April 2023. The Cochrane Collaboration's risk-of-bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias and grading of the recommendations assessment, development, and evaluation system for each outcome. The between-study variance was estimated using a random-effects model. A total of 13 studies (including = 994 participants) met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis results revealed a nom-significant ( = 0.072) odds ratio (OR) of 0.54 (0.28-1.07) for the fusion rate. Regarding operation time, a non-significant difference ( = 0.573) among both surgical techniques was found (mean differences (MD) = 3.40 min [-11.08 to 17.88]). However, hospital length stay and overall complications revealed significant differences (MD = 2.29 days [0.63 to 3.95], = 0.017 and OR = 0.47 [0.26 to 0.83], = 0.016), respectively. Our findings showed a non-statistically significant fusion rate. On the other hand, operation time was similar among both surgical techniques, without significant differences. Nevertheless, lower hospital stay was found in patients that were operated on with arthroscopy. Finally, for the outcome of overall complications, the ankle arthroscopy technique was a protective factor in comparison with open surgery.
PubMed: 37240680
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12103574 -
Orthopedic Reviews Nov 2020The controversy in surgical management of end-stage tibiotalar arthritis with Total Ankle Arthroplasty (TAA) versus Ankle Arthrodesis (AA) has grown in parallel with the...
The controversy in surgical management of end-stage tibiotalar arthritis with Total Ankle Arthroplasty (TAA) versus Ankle Arthrodesis (AA) has grown in parallel with the evolution of both procedures. No randomized controlled trials exist due to the vast differences in surgical goals, patient expectations, and complication profiles between the two procedures. This makes high quality systematic reviews necessary to compare outcomes between these two treatment options. The aim of this study was to provide a systematic review with meta-analysis of publications reporting outcomes, complications, and revision data following third-generation TAA and/or modern AA published in the past decade. Thirtyfive articles met eligibility criteria, which included 4312 TAA and 1091 AA procedures. This review reports data from a mean follow-up of 4.9 years in the TAA cohort and 4.0 years in the AA cohort. There was no significant difference in overall complication rate following TAA compared to AA (23.6% and 25.7% respectively, P-value 0.31). Similarly, there was no significant difference in revision rate following TAA compared to AA (7.2% and 6.3% respectively, P-value 0.65). Successful treatment of end-stage tibiotalar arthritis requires an understanding of a patients' goals and expectations, coupled with appropriate patient selection for the chosen procedure. The decision to proceed with TAA or AA should be made on a case-by-case basis following an informed discussion with the patient regarding the different goals and complication profiles for each procedure.
PubMed: 33312482
DOI: 10.4081/or.2020.8279 -
Orthopaedic Surgery Feb 2023The efficacies and safety of oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) remains controversial, and long-term clinical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The efficacies and safety of oblique lateral interbody fusion (OLIF) for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS) remains controversial, and long-term clinical efficacies in particular need to be explored. This study is designed accordingly, therefore, we searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ProQuest, OVID, and SinoMed for literature, regardless of publication date or language. Taking 12 months after operation as the shortest limit, the outcome measures were extracted, including visual analog scale (VAS), Oswetry dysfunction index (ODI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, intervertebral disk height (IDH), foraminal height (FH), lumbar lordosis (LL), segment lordosis (SL), slip ratio, and incidence of surgical complications. Meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.4 and Stata 16.0, and results were expressed with MD and 95% CI, and two-sided p-values with p < 0.05 being statistically significant. In total, 17 clinical studies (n = 689 patients) were screened, with an average patient age of 63.4 years. Our study revealed that VAS decreased by 4.55 (low back pain) and 5.46 (leg pain) points, respectively. And ODI score decreased by an average of 33.82% while JOA score increased by an average of 11.56 points. In terms of imaging indicators, mean IDH and FH increased by 4.18 and 4.91 mm, mean LL and SL improved by 9.22° and 2.46°, respectively. Besides, mean slip ratio decreased by 10.45%. The incidence of complications was statistically analyzed in 18 studies, with a rate of 4%-54% and an overall incidence of 19%. To sum up, our study was the first to focus on the long-term efficacies of OLIF treatment for DLS, and to provide further clinical evidence. However, long-term follow-up multicenter randomized controlled trials are still needed for further evaluation.
Topics: Humans; Middle Aged; Spondylolisthesis; Lordosis; Retrospective Studies; Lumbosacral Region; Low Back Pain; Treatment Outcome; Spinal Fusion; Lumbar Vertebrae; Multicenter Studies as Topic
PubMed: 36479592
DOI: 10.1111/os.13588 -
Medicine Mar 2021Ankle fusion is the primary treatment for advanced ankle arthritis. With the advancement of arthroscopy technology, ankle arthroscopy fusion has shown many advantages... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Ankle fusion is the primary treatment for advanced ankle arthritis. With the advancement of arthroscopy technology, ankle arthroscopy fusion has shown many advantages over traditional surgery. However, there are few related studies globally, and evidence-based medicine is needed to verify the reliability and feasibility of ankle arthroscopy fusion.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis and open ankle arthrodesis.
METHODS
We searched the databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure [CNKI], Wanfang Database, and VIP Database for published prospective or retrospective controlled studies of arthroscopic-assisted ankle fusion in the treatment of advanced ankle arthritis. The dates were limited from the construction of the library to June 30, 2019. Literature was included based on the principles and methods of evidence-based medicine. Literature retrieval, data extraction, and quality assessment were performed by 2 independent reviewers using the Cochrane 5.1 risk bias assessment tool. The methodological bias of the literature was evaluated, and a meta-analysis was using by RevMan 5.3 software.
RESULTS
A total of 18 studies and 1102 patients were included in the study, including 551 in the arthroscopic surgery group and 551 in the open surgery group. Arthroscopy-assisted surgery for advanced ankle arthritis was more effective than open surgery in terms of fusion rate (odd ratio[OR] = 3.32, 95% confidence interval[CI]:2.16, 5.10), fusion time (mean difference[MD] = -2.31, 95% CI:-4.63, -2.21), intraoperative blood loss (MD = -43.37, 95%CI: -48.49, -38.25), hospital stay (MD = -1.80, 95%CI: -2.28, -1.33), and visual analog scale score (MD = -1.75, 95%CI: -2.04, -1.46). In addition, rate of complications (OR = 0.33, 95%CI: 0.21, 0.52) was superior to open ankle fusion (P < .00001).
CONCLUSION
Arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis has more advantages than open ankle arthrodesis in improving the fusion rate and reducing complications, which is worthy of clinical application.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42020195727.
Topics: Ankle Joint; Arthrodesis; Arthroscopy; Blood Loss, Surgical; Feasibility Studies; Humans; Length of Stay; Osteoarthritis; Postoperative Complications; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Recovery of Function; Reproducibility of Results; Severity of Illness Index; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33725876
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000024998