Numerous techniques are used for the fusion of failed TAR. We wish to report our results of the revision of failed TAR to fusion. Between July 2005 and February 2011 the senior author had performed 20 arthrodeses in 19 patients (13 male and 6 female) who had failed total ankle arthroplasty (TAR). Their mean age was 63.5 years. All of them had the AES total ankle replacement. (Biomet UK). The mean period from the original TAR to fusion was 51 months (6 to72). The indication for revision of TAR to fusion was septic loosening in 4 patients and osteolysis and or aseptic loosening in 16 cases. Three types of fusion techniques were used. The mean follow-up was 15 months. All 3 tibiotalar arthrodeses with screws alone fused successfully. Of the 13 patients where the fusion was augmented with an Ilizarov frame, 4 were done for septic loosening. There were 2 non unions of which one was stable without pain and the other required a further revision fusion with a frame and subsequently fused. Of the 9 patients who had a fusion with a frame for osteolysis and or aseptic loosening, there was one non union which was revised to a tibiotalocalacaneal fusion with a hind foot nail. The nail fractured at the level of the posterior oblique screw hole. The patient subsequently developed a relatively pain free non-union of the tibiotalar joint and not required further surgical intervention. The remaining 8 ankles fused at a mean of 5 months. The average time of frame removal was 17 weeks. There was four pin-site infection all of which settled with oral antibiotics. 5 patients had tibiotalocalacaneal fusion with a hind foot nail. The indication for the hind foot nail was significant osteolysis and loss of talar bone stock. The average shortening as a result of the fusion for the failed TAR was 1.5cms. Our results were comparable to the previous reports of arthrodesis for failed total ankle replacement. We recommend the use of tibiotalocalcaneal fusion with a hind foot nail in the presence of severe osteolysis or accompanying subtalar arthritis. In the presence of good bone stock an ankle fusion supplemented with a circular frame gives a good predictable outcome

Aims

Surgical reconstruction of deformed Charcot feet carries a high risk of nonunion, metalwork failure, and deformity recurrence. The primary aim of this study was to identify the factors contributing to these complications following hindfoot Charcot reconstructions.

We report the outcomes of 20 patients (12 men, 8 women, 21 feet) with Charcot neuro-arthropathy who underwent correction of deformities of the ankle and hindfoot using retrograde intramedullary nail arthrodesis. The mean age of the patients was 62.6 years (46 to 83); their mean BMI was 32.7 (15 to 47) and their median American Society of Anaesthetists score was 3 (2 to 4). All presented with severe deformities and 15 had chronic ulceration. All were treated with reconstructive surgery and seven underwent simultaneous midfoot fusion using a bolt, locking plate or a combination of both. At a mean follow-up of 26 months (8 to 54), limb salvage was achieved in all patients and 12 patients (80%) with ulceration achieved healing and all but one patient regained independent mobilisation. There was failure of fixation with a broken nail requiring revision surgery in one patient. Migration of distal locking screws occurred only when standard screws had been used but not with hydroxyapatite-coated screws. The mean American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Foot and Ankle (AAOS-FAO) score improved from 50.7 (17 to 88) to 65.2 (22 to 88), (p = 0.015). The mean Short Form (SF)-36 Health Survey Physical Component Score improved from 25.2 (16.4 to 42.8) to 29.8 (17.7 to 44.2), (p = 0.003) and the mean Euroqol EQ‑5D‑5L score improved from 0.63 (0.51 to 0.78) to 0.67 (0.57 to 0.84), (p = 0.012).

Single-stage correction of deformity using an intramedullary hindfoot arthrodesis nail is a good form of treatment for patients with severe Charcot hindfoot deformity, ulceration and instability provided a multidisciplinary care plan is delivered.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:76–82.