Comparison of First- and Second-Generation Fixed-Bearing Total Ankle Arthroplasty Using a Modular Intramedullary Tibial Component.
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 25769492.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1177/1071100715576568.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
This series reviews the clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients who underwent total ankle replacement (TAR) using first- and second-generations of a modern fixed-bearing prosthesis utilizing a modular intramedullary stem. A consecutive series of first- and second-generation primary TARs with modular intramedullary stems were identified. Clinical outcome data were collected prospectively--including visual analog scale for pain, American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society hindfoot-ankle, Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment, and Short Form-36 scores. Preoperative coronal plane deformity and correction of deformity after TAR were assessed. Complications, subsequent procedures, and failure rates were compared. A total of 193 first- and 56 second-generation patients were identified with a mean follow-up of 3.7 and 2.1 years, respectively. Clinical outcome data reflected significant improvements at 1 year postoperatively, and improvements were maintained at 2-year follow-up for each group. Improvement in visual analog scale scores were significantly better in the second-generation group at 1 year postoperatively, but this was not maintained at 2 years. Mean coronal tibiotalar angles for ankles with preoperative varus or valgus deformities were significantly improved. Correction was maintained until final follow-up, with no significant differences in deformity improvement between groups. The rate of reoperation at 2 years postoperatively on the affected foot or ankle subsequent to the index ankle replacement for patients in the first-generation group (18.5%) was higher compared to the second-generation group (15.9%), but the time until reoperation was not statistically significant (P = .376). The implant failure rate was higher in the first-generation group (6.0%) compared to the second-generation group (2.6%) at 2 years postoperatively, but the time until failure was not significantly different (P = .295). Patients who underwent TAR with a first- or second-generation fixed-bearing prosthesis with an intramedullary tibial component demonstrated significant improvements in all measures of pain and function with sustained improvements in coronal plane alignment. The second-generation prosthesis demonstrated slightly better improvements at 1 year and was associated with lower reoperation and implant failure rates. Level II, comparative series.
Medical subject headings
- Arthroplasty, Replacement, Ankle
- Joint Prosthesis
- Patient Outcome Assessment
Anatomy
- ankle
- tibia