1. Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Revision Total Ankle Arthroplasty Using an Intramedullary-Referencing Implant
- Author
-
W. Hodges Davis, Thomas B. Bemenderfer, Steve B. Behrens, Robert B. Anderson, Oliver N. Schipper, Susan M. Odum, and Todd A. Irwin
- Subjects
Adult ,Male ,Reoperation ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Joint Prosthesis ,Radiography ,Aseptic loosening ,Ankle arthritis ,Prosthesis Design ,law.invention ,Intramedullary rod ,Arthroplasty, Replacement, Ankle ,Disability Evaluation ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,law ,Osteoarthritis ,medicine ,Humans ,Orthopedics and Sports Medicine ,Patient Reported Outcome Measures ,Aged ,Retrospective Studies ,030222 orthopedics ,Revision arthroplasty ,business.industry ,030229 sport sciences ,Middle Aged ,Prosthesis Failure ,Surgery ,Total ankle arthroplasty ,Female ,Implant ,business - Abstract
Background: Treatment of failed total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) is challenging. Limited literature is available on options and outcomes of revision arthroplasty despite failure rates ranging from 10% to 23% within 10 years after primary TAA. This study reports the clinical and radiographic outcomes of revision TAA using a fixed-bearing, intramedullary-referencing implant. Methods: A retrospective review was performed of 18 consecutive revision TAA cases between 2008-2015 using an intramedullary-referencing, fixed-bearing, 2-component total ankle system. Demographic and radiographic data were collected preoperatively, immediately postoperatively, and at the most recent follow-up. Functional outcome data were collected immediately postoperatively and at mean follow-up 47.5 months. Results: Eighteen patients underwent revision TAA, with 77.8% (14/18) implant survival. Index revision was performed most commonly for aseptic talar subsidence (55.6%) or implant loosening (tibia, 29.4%; talus, 58.9%). Following revision, 22.2% (4/18) patients required reoperation at a mean 57.3 (39-86) months. Osteolysis of the tibia, talus, and fibula was present preoperatively in 66.7% (12/18), 38.9% (7/18), and 38.9% (7/18) of patients, respectively, with progression of osteolysis in 27.8% (5/18), 11.1% (2/18) and 11.1% (2/18) of patients, respectively. Subsidence of the tibial and talar revision components was observed in 38.9% (7/18) and 55.6% (10/18) of patients, respectively. The median American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) score was 74.5 (26-100) and Foot Function Index (FFI) score 10.2 (0-50.4). Conclusion: Early results of intramedullary-referencing revision TAA demonstrated good patient-reported outcomes with maintenance of radiographic parameters at mean follow-up of 47.5 months. Aseptic talar subsidence or loosening were the main postoperative causes of reoperation. Revision arthroplasty utilizing an intramedullary-referencing implant was a viable option for the failed TAA. Level of Evidence: Level IV, case series.
- Published
- 2020