Search

Background: Treatment of displaced tarsal navicular body fractures usually consists of open reduction and internal fixation. However, there is little literature reporting results of this treatment and correlation to fracture severity. Methods: We report the results of 24 patients treated in our institution over a 12-year period. Primary outcome measurements were Visual-Analogue-Scale Foot and Ankle score (VAS-FA), AOFAS midfoot score, and talonavicular osteoarthritis at final follow-up. According to a new classification system reflecting talonavicular joint damage, 2-part fractures were classified as type I, multifragmentary fractures as type II, and fractures with talonavicular joint dislocation and/or concomitant talar head fractures as type III. Spearman’s coefficients tested this classification’s correlation with the primary outcome measurements. Mean patient age was 33 (range 16-61) years and mean follow-up duration 73 (range 24-159) months. Results: Average VAS-FA score was 74.7 (standard deviation [SD] 16.9), and average AOFAS midfoot score was 83.8 (SD = 12.8). Final radiographs showed no talonavicular arthritis in 5 patients, grade 1 in 7, grade 2 in 3, grade 3 in 6, and grade 4 in 1 patient. Two patients had secondary or spontaneous talonavicular fusion. Spearman coefficients showed strong correlation of the classification system with VAS-FA score (r = −0.663, P < .005) and talonavicular arthritis (r = 0.600, P = .003), and moderate correlation with AOFAS score (r = −.509, P = .011). Conclusion: At midterm follow-up, open reduction and internal fixation of navicular body fractures led to good clinical outcome but was closely related to fracture severity. A new classification based on the degree of talonavicular joint damage showed close correlation to clinical and radiologic outcome. Level of Evidence: Level IV, retrospective case series. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A fixed cavovarus foot deformity can be associated with anteromedial ankle arthrosis due to elevated medial joint contact stresses. Supramalleolar valgus osteotomies (SMOT) and lateralizing calcaneal osteotomies (LCOT) are commonly used to treat symptoms by redistributing joint contact forces. In a cavovarus model, the effects of SMOT and LCOT on the lateralization of the center of force (COF) and reduction of the peak pressure in the ankle joint were compared. Methods: A previously published cavovarus model with fixed hindfoot varus was simulated in 10 cadaver specimens. Closing wedge supramalleolar valgus osteotomies 3 cm above the ankle joint level (6 and 11 degrees) and lateral sliding calcaneal osteotomies (5 and 10 mm displacement) were analyzed at 300 N axial static load (half body weight). The COF migration and peak pressure decrease in the ankle were recorded using high-resolution TekScan pressure sensors. Results: A significant lateral COF shift was observed for each osteotomy: 2.1 mm for the 6 degrees (P = .014) and 2.3 mm for the 11 degrees SMOT (P = .010). The 5 mm LCOT led to a lateral shift of 2.0 mm (P = .042) and the 10 mm LCOT to a shift of 3.0 mm (P = .006). Comparing the different osteotomies among themselves no significant differences were recorded. No significant anteroposterior COF shift was seen. A significant peak pressure reduction was recorded for each osteotomy: The SMOT led to a reduction of 29% (P = .033) for the 6 degrees and 47% (P = .003) for the 11 degrees osteotomy, and the LCOT to a reduction of 41% (P = .003) for the 5 mm and 49% (P = .002) for the 10 mm osteotomy. Similar to the COF lateralization no significant differences between the osteotomies were seen. Conclusion: LCOT and SMOT significantly reduced anteromedial ankle joint contact stresses in this cavovarus model. The unloading effects of both osteotomies were equivalent. More correction did not lead to significantly more lateralization of the COF or more reduction of peak pressure but a trend was seen. Clinical Relevance: In patients with fixed cavovarus feet, both SMOT and LCOT provided equally good redistribution of elevated ankle joint contact forces. Increasing the amount of displacement did not seem to equally improve the joint pressures. The site of osteotomy could therefore be chosen on the basis of surgeon's preference, simplicity, or local factors in case of more complex reconstructions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]