We present the results of ankle fusion using the
Achieving arthrodesis of the ankle can be difficult
in the presence of infection, deformity, poor soft tissues and bone loss.
We present a series of 48 patients with complex ankle pathology,
treated with the
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. 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.Aims
Methods
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the
clinical results of a newly designed prosthesis to replace the body
of the talus in patients with aseptic necrosis. Between 1999 and
2006, 22 tali in 22 patients were replaced with a ceramic prosthesis.
A total of eight patients were treated with the first-generation
prosthesis, incorporating a peg to fix into the retained neck and
head of the talus, and the remaining 14 were treated with the second-generation prosthesis,
which does not have the peg. The clinical results were assessed
by the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society ankle/hindfoot
scale. The mean follow-up was 98 months (18 to 174). The clinical results
of the first-generation prostheses were excellent in three patients,
good in one, fair in three and poor in one. There were, however,
radiological signs of loosening, prompting a change in design. The
clinical results of the second-generation prostheses were excellent
in three patients, good in five, fair in four and poor in two, with
more favourable radiological appearances. Revision was required
using a total talar implant in four patients, two in each group. Although the second-generation prosthesis produced better results,
we cannot recommend the use of a talar body prosthesis. We now recommend
the use of a total talar implant in these patients.