COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE

Comparison of Treatment Outcomes of Arthrodesis and Two Generations of Ankle Replacement Implants

Marisa R Benich, William R Ledoux, Michael S Orendurff, Jane B Shofer, Sigvard T Hansen, James Davitt, John G Anderson, Donald Bohay, J Chris Coetzee, John Maskill, Michael Brage, Michael Houghton, Bruce J Sangeorzan
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume 2017 November 1, 99 (21): 1792-1800
29088033

BACKGROUND: We analyzed self-reported outcomes in a prospective cohort of patients treated with ankle arthrodesis or total ankle replacement (TAR) during a time of transition from older to newer-generation TAR implants.

METHODS: We performed a prospective cohort study comparing outcomes in 273 consecutive patients treated for ankle arthritis with arthrodesis or TAR between 2005 and 2011. Adult patients with end-stage ankle arthritis who were able to walk and willing and able to respond to surveys were included in the study. Patients were excluded when they had another lower-limb problem that might affect walking. At baseline and at 6, 12, 24, and 36-month follow-up visits, participants completed a pain score, a Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (MFA), and a Short Form-36 (SF-36) survey.

RESULTS: There was significant mean improvement in most outcomes after surgery regardless of procedure. In general, the greatest improvement occurred during the first 6 months of follow-up. Linear mixed-effects regression adjusted for differences at baseline in age, body mass index (BMI), and surgery type showed that at 6 months the scores were improved by a mean (and standard error) of 12.6 ± 0.7 (33%) on the MFA, 22.0 ± 1.4 (56%) on the SF-36 Physical Functioning (PF) scale, 32.4 ± 1.6 (93%) on the SF-36 Bodily Pain (BP) scale, and 4.0 ± 0.2 (63%) on the pain rating scale. The mean improvements in the MFA and SF-36 PF scores over the 3-year follow-up period were significantly better after the TARs than after the arthrodeses, with differences between the 2 groups of 3.6 ± 1.6 (p = 0.023) and 7.5 ± 2.9 (p = 0.0098), respectively. The differences between the 2 groups were slightly greater when only the newer TAR devices were compared with the arthrodeses (MFA = 3.8 ± 1.8 [p = 0.031], SF-36 PF = 8.8 ± 3.3 [p = 0.0074], SF-36 BP = 7.3 ± 3.6 [p = 0.045], and pain score = 0.8 ± 0.4 [p = 0.038]).

CONCLUSIONS: Patients reported improved comfort and function after both surgical treatments. The average improvement in the MFA and SF-36 PF scores was better after TAR than after arthrodesis, particularly when the TAR had been done with later-generation implants. Younger patients had greater functional improvements than older patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Trending Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
29088033
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"