Aims. Infected and deformed neuropathic feet and ankles are serious challenges for surgical management. In this study we present our experience in performing ankle arthrodesis in a closed manner, without surgical preparation of the joint surfaces by cartilaginous debridement, but instead using an Ilizarov ring fixator (IRF) for deformity correction and facilitating fusion, in arthritic neuropathic ankles with associated osteomyelitis. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed all the patients who underwent closed ankle arthrodesis (CAA) in Ilizarov Scientific Centre from 2013 to 2018 (Group A) and compared them with a similar group of patients (Group B) who underwent open ankle arthrodesis (OAA). We then divided the neuropathic patients into three arthritic subgroups: Charcot joint, Charcot-Maire-Tooth disease, and post-traumatic arthritis. All arthrodeses were performed by using an Ilizarov ring fixator. All patients were followed up clinically and radiologically for a minimum of 12 months to assess union and function. Results. The union rate for Group A was 81% (17/21) while it was 84.6% (33/39) for Group B. All the nonunions in Group A underwent revision with an open technique and achieved 100% union. Mean duration of IRF was 71.5 days (59 to 82) in Group A and 69 days (64.8 to 77.7) in Group B. The American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) hindfoot score was similar in both groups. The postoperative hospital stay was shorter in Group A (21 days (SD 8)) than Group B (28 days (SD 9)). In the latter Group there were more problems with wound healing and greater requirement for antibiotic treatment. The mean operating time was 40 minutes (SD 9) in Group A compared to 80 minutes (SD 13) in Group B. Recurrence of infection occurred in 19% (4/21) and 15.5% (6/39) for Group A and Group B respectively. Conclusion. We found CAA using an IRF to be an effective method for ankle arthrodesis in infected neuropathic foot and ankle cases and afforded comparable results to open methods. Due to its great advantages, Ilizarov method of CAA should always be considered for neuropathic ankles in suitable patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(4):470–477

Objectives. Our objective was to perform a systematic review of the literature and conduct a meta-analysis to investigate the outcomes of open versus arthroscopic methods of ankle fusion. Methods. In accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement standards, we performed a systematic review. Electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched to identify randomised and non-randomised studies comparing outcomes of arthroscopic and open ankle arthrodesis. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the methodological quality and risk of bias of the selected studies. Fixed-effect or random-effects models were applied to calculate pooled outcome data. Results. We identified one prospective cohort study and 5 retrospective cohort studies, enrolling a total of 286 patients with ankle arthritis. Our analysis showed that open ankle fusion was associated with a lower fusion rate (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.13–0.52, P = 0.0002), longer tourniquet time (MD 16.49, 95% CI 9.46–23.41, P<0.00001), and longer length of stay (MD 1.60,95% CI 1.10–2.10, P<0.00001) compared to arthroscopic ankle fusion; however, there was no significant difference between two groups in terms of infection rate (OR 2.41, 95% CI 0.76–7.64, P = 0.14), overall complication rate (OR: 1.54, 95% CI 0.80–2.96, P = 0.20), and operation time (MD 4.09, 95% CI −2.49–10.66, P = 0.22). The between-study heterogeneity was high for tourniquet time but low or moderate for other outcomes. The direction of the effect sizes remains unchanged throughout sensitivity analyses. Conclusions. The best available evidence demonstrates that arthroscopic ankle fusion may be associated with a higher fusion rate, shorter tourniquet time, and shorter length of stay compared to open ankle fusion. We found no significant difference between two groups in terms of infection rate, overall complication rate, and operation time. The best available evidence is not adequately robust to make definitive conclusions. Long-term results of the comparative efficacy of arthroscopic ankle fusion over open ankle fusion are not currently available. Further high quality randomised controlled trials that are adequately powered are required

Objectives. Our objective was to perform a systematic review of the literature and conduct a meta-analysis to investigate the outcomes of open versus arthroscopic methods of ankle fusion. Methods. In accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement standards, we performed a systematic review. Electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched to identify randomised and non-randomised studies comparing outcomes of arthroscopic and open ankle arthrodesis. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to assess the methodological quality and risk of bias of the selected studies. Fixed-effect or random-effects models were applied to calculate pooled outcome data. Results. We identified one prospective cohort study and 5 retrospective cohort studies, enrolling a total of 286 patients with ankle arthritis. Our analysis showed that open ankle fusion was associated with a lower fusion rate (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.13–0.52, P = 0.0002), longer tourniquet time (MD 16.49, 95% CI 9.46–23.41, P<0.00001), and longer length of stay (MD 1.60,95% CI 1.10–2.10, P<0.00001) compared to arthroscopic ankle fusion; however, there was no significant difference between two groups in terms of infection rate (OR 2.41, 95% CI 0.76–7.64, P = 0.14), overall complication rate (OR: 1.54, 95% CI 0.80–2.96, P = 0.20), and operation time (MD 4.09, 95% CI −2.49–10.66, P = 0.22). The between-study heterogeneity was high for tourniquet time but low or moderate for other outcomes. The direction of the effect sizes remains unchanged throughout sensitivity analyses. Conclusions. The best available evidence demonstrates that arthroscopic ankle fusion may be associated with a higher fusion rate, shorter tourniquet time, and shorter length of stay compared to open ankle fusion. We found no significant difference between two groups in terms of infection rate, overall complication rate, and operation time. The best available evidence is not adequately robust to make definitive conclusions. Long-term results of the comparative efficacy of arthroscopic ankle fusion over open ankle fusion are not currently available. Further high quality randomised controlled trials that are adequately powered are required

Patients often comment on swelling after foot and ankle surgery. However the relationship between swelling and outcome (pain and function) has not previously been outlined. A recent study by Pinsker and Daniels demonstrated that while swelling was rated as important by patients it was rarely included in outcome scores. The purpose of this paper was to determine the relationship between swelling and outcome after ankle fusion or replacement. A secondary purpose was to determine how this relationship changed in time, how swelling score changed before and after surgery, and determine differences in swelling score between total ankle replacement (TAR), open ankle arthrodesis (OAA) and arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis (AAA). The COFAS prospective ankle arthritis database enrolls patients in 4 centers undergoing surgery by one of 6 surgeons since 2002. The MODEMS outcomes package from AAOS was used, with the validated ankle osteoarthritis score (AOS) score being used to assess outcomes in the pain and disability domains. The swelling score was indexed from 1 to 5, 1 being no swelling and 5 being severe swelling. Outcomes were recorded preoperatively and annually up to 2010. Statistical analysis was performed using 95% confidence intervals and correlations being determined using Pearson's correlation and r2 values. The swelling score was correlated with AOS score with an r2 of 0.13 for postoperative patients. With the swelling score analysed categorically the difference of outcome was significant with a mean AOS score of 15.1 (CI 13.3 to 16.9) for a swelling score of 1, 23 (CI 21.7 to 24.9) for a swelling score of 2, 31 (CI 29.6 to 33.1) for 33.6 (CI 34.9 to 38.8) for 4, and 39 (CI 35.3 to 43.0) for 5. Swelling scores fell outside the 95% confidence intervals for all groups indicating that the AOS outcome of swelling score 5 patients was worse than the 4 group, 4 worse than 3, 3 worse than 2, and 2 worse than 1. Patients with swelling scores of 1 scored 24 points better than those with a swelling score of 5. Swelling scores were the same preoperatively for total ankle arthroplasty, Arthroscopic and open fusions. However swelling scores were lower for arthroscopic fusions after surgery for all time periods at an average of 2.1 (CI 1.9 to 2.2), compared to total ankle arthroplasty (2.5, CI 2.4 to 2.6) and open ankle fusion (2.5, CI 2.4 to 2.6). Swelling has a major relationship with outcome. Swelling may be the cause of poorer outcomes for open ankle fusion compared to arthroscopic. Swelling is an independent factor as swelling scores for TAA were higher compared to AAA despite similar outcomes. Arthroscopic surgery reduces the postoperative swelling. Methods to reduce swelling such as compression stockings, elevation, controlling bleeding may result in better outcomes. Minimising the invasiveness of surgery achieves this goal. Patient education about swelling, elevation and compression stockings would assist in these goals

As an alternative to ankle replacement, ankle arthrodesis remains a mainstay in the treatment of end-stage arthritis. Arthroscopic techniques for ankle arthrodesis have more recently been developed, although there has been limited research exploring the cost of arthroscopic (AAA) versus open ankle arthrodesis (OAA), and comparing ankle fusions to replacement (TAA). We hypothesise that resource use after AAA will be lower than that after OAA, and both will be lower than TAA. We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively collected database. The COFAS database was used to identify patients with >2 years of follow up who have undergone AAA, OAA or Hintegra TAA at St Paul's Hospital between 2003–2010. Ninety patients with TAA, 52 with AAA and 56 with OAA met our inclusion criteria. The following data were documented: patient demographics (age, gender, presence of diabetes, inflammatory arthritis or any smoking history), factors related to the index surgery (type of surgery, OR time, length of stay) and factors relating to the post-operative course (number of post-operative clinic visits, OR time for re-operations, length of stay for additional hospital admissions). In terms of the index surgery, AAA required less initial OR time compared to either OAA or TAA. Initial length of hospital stay was significantly longer for both TAA and OAA, compared to AAA. Patients attended more follow-up visits after TAA or OAA compared to after AAA. In terms of additional OR time required, no significant differences were found among the groups. The most common reason for re-operation was infection or wound breakdown (38% of re-operations), followed by removal of hardware (15%). TAA also required significantly more additional days in hospital compared to either OAA or AAA. For all significant comparisons, p < 0.05. For each primary TAA, on average an additional one hour of surgery, three days in hospital and seven clinic visits were required on top of the cost factored for the primary arthroplasty. For each primary AAA, an additional four clinic visits, 23 minutes of revision surgery and one day in hospital were required. For each primary OAA, an average additional five clinic visits, three minutes of OR time, and 0.2 days of additional hospital stay occurred during follow up. Using several measures of resource use, we find that arthroscopic ankle fusions compare favourably to both ankle replacements and open ankle fusions. We also show that resource utilisation measurements can be a useful surrogate for complications, and that resource utilisation can demonstrate the practical implications of complications for patients, surgeons and health care resources

With the increasing number of implantation of total ankle arthroplasty a higher rate of pitfalls and failures has to be expected. Intra- and postoperative complications in total ankle arthroplasty, their sources of failure and revision options are demonstrated. In the time of 7/97 until 1/06 269 S.T.A.R. total ankle prostheses have been implanted at our hospital. Intraoperative complications occurred in 7 cases (4 fractures of the malleolus medialis, 2 fractures of distal fibula, 1 fissure of talus). We observed early complications in form of delayed wound healing (n=31) and 4 deep infections. A higher incidence of secondary wound healing is shown in rheumatoid arthritis patients in comparison to patients with OA. Late complications included persisting intraarticular synovitis, especially in rheumatoid arthritis, an impingement (11 cases) and osteolysis (4 cases). Revision surgery was performed in 45 cases (16.7%) 1.5 years after primary implantation (14 operations with problems in secondary wound healing, 9 lengthenings of the Achilles tendon with a dorsal capsulotomy (2 rheumatoid arthritis patients), 11 revisions of the PE gliding core with resection of periarticular hypertrophic bone formation, 4 revisions of singular components, 2 complete revisions of the prosthesis, 4 ankle fusions, 1 amputation. Only in 18 cases (6.7%) these complications and the following surgical procedures influenced the satisfaction of the patients. Despite the demonstrated complications, total ankle arthroplasty is more than an alternative to open ankle arthrodesis in the progressive phases of arthritic joint destruction, also in RA at a LDE stage ≥ III

We reviewed 116 patients who underwent 118 arthroscopic ankle arthrodeses. The mean age at operation was 57 years, 2 months (20 to 86 years). The indication for operation was post-traumatic osteoarthritis in 67, primary osteoarthritis in 36, inflammatory arthropathy in 13 and avascular necrosis in two. The mean follow-up was 65 months (18 to 144). Nine patients (10 ankles) died before final review and three were lost to follow-up, leaving 104 patients (105 ankles) who were assessed by a standard telephone interview. The pre-operative talocrural deformity was between 22° valgus and 28° varus, 94 cases were within 10° varus/valgus. The mean time to union was 12 weeks (6 to 20). Nonunion occurred in nine cases (7.6%). Other complications included 22 cases requiring removal of a screw for prominence, three superficial infections, two deep vein thromboses/pulmonary emboli, one revision of fixation, one stress fracture and one deep infection. Six patients had a subtalar fusion at a mean of 48 months after ankle fusion. There were 48 patients with excellent, 35 with good, 10 with fair and 11 with poor clinical results.

Regardless of the method used, open ankle arthrodesis is known to have a high rate of nonunion, reported to range from 4% to 25%. Salvage of failed ankle fusion is thus a relatively common procedure. Further, in cases of bone loss after distal tibial trauma, necrosis of the talus, Charcot joints and severe deformities of the ankle, there are known to be increased incidences of delayed union and nonunion. Since 1997, 25 salvage ankle arthrodesis procedures have been performed, using a retrograde interlocking intramedullary nail as fixation. In this paper we discuss the indications, surgical techniques and results. At a mean of nine weeks postoperatively, union was achieved in all cases. Complications included one case of late sepsis, which presented four years after surgery. During the operation one tibial fracture occurred. One distal screw backed out. The fixation was removed from three patients, one for late sepsis, one for septic nonunion, and the patient in whom the tibia fractured