Joint Distraction in Advanced Osteoarthritis of the Ankle | ||
| The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery | ||
| مقاله 2، دوره 5، شماره 4، مهر 2017، صفحه 208-212 اصل مقاله (420.87 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: CURRENT CONCEPTS REVIEW | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22038/abjs.2017.12062.1289 | ||
| نویسنده | ||
| E. Carlos RODRIGUEZ-MERCHAN* | ||
| Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, La Paz University Hospital, Madrid, Spain | ||
| چکیده | ||
| replacement (TAR) in patients with advanced ankle osteoarthritis (OA). AJD could a tenable option to ankle fusion or TAR. Methods: A review has been performed on the role of AJD in advanced OA of the ankle. The exploration machine was MedLine. The keywords utilized were: joint distraction ankle. Three hundred and eleven articles were found. Of the above-mentioned, only 14 were chosen and analyzed because they were rigorously focused on the issue and the question of this paper. Results: Forty-seven patients met inclusion criteria with 15 in the acute RSA group and 32 in the secondary RSA group. The acute RSA group demonstrated better external rotation (28˚) than the secondary RSA group (18˚, P=0.0495). The acute RSA group showed a trend towards better Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores. Tuberosity healing rate was higher in the acute RSA group. Conclusion: The types of articles published until now have a poor level of evidence (levels III and IV). The overall number of patients managed until now by way of AJD is 249. The published mean follow-up is very variable, from 1 year to 12 years. The rate of good outcomes ranged between 73% and 91%. The percentage of failure (final ankle arthrodesis or TAR) ranged between 6.2% and 44%. A minimum of 5.8 mm of distraction gap must be achieved. Ankle function after AJD deteriorates over time. Putting together ankle movement and distraction will result in an early and maintained profitable influence on outcome. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Ankle؛ failures؛ joint distraction؛ Osteoarthritis؛ Results | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
1. van Valburg AA, van Roermund PM, Lammens J, van Melkebeek J, Verbout AJ, Lafeber EP, et al. Can Ilizarov joint distraction delay the need for an arthrodesis of the ankle? A preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1995; 77(5):720-5. 2. Sharifi SR, Ebrahimzadeh MH, Ahmadzadeh-Chabok H, Khajeh-Mozaffari J. Closed total talus dislocation without fracture: a case report. Cases J. 2009; 2(2):9132. 3. Gharehdaghi M, Rahimi H, Mousavian A. Anterior ankle arthrodesis with molded plate: technique and outcomes. Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2014; 2(3):203-9. 4. Kluesner AJ, Wukich DK. Ankle arthrodiastasis. Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2009; 26(2):227-44. 5. Paley D, Lamm BM. Ankle joint distraction. Foot Ankle Clin. 2005; 10(4):685-98. 6. Judet R, Judet T. The use of a hinge distraction apparatus after arthrolysis and arthroplasty (author’s transl). Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1978; 64(5):353-65. 7. van Valburg AA, van Roermund PM, Marijnissen AC, van Melkebeek J, Lammens J, Verbout AJ, et al. Joint distraction in treatment of osteoarthritis: a two-year follow-up of the ankle. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 1999; 7(5):474-9. 8. Marijnissen AC, Van Roermund PM, Van Melkebeek J, Schenk W, Verbout AJ, Bijlsma JW, et al. Clinical benefit of joint distraction in the treatment of severe osteoarthritis of the ankle: proof of concept in an open prospective study and in a randomized controlled study. Arthritis Rheum. 2002; 46(11):2893-902. 9. Ploegmakers JJ, van Roermund PM, van Melkebeek J, Lammens J, Bijlsma JW, Lafeber FP, et al. Prolonged clinical benefit from joint distraction in the treatment of ankle osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2005; 13(7):582-8. 10. Paley D, Lamm BM, Purohit RM, Specht SC. Distraction arthroplasty of the ankle--how far can you stretch the indications? Foot Ankle Clin. 2008; 13(3):471-84. 11. Tellisi N, Fragomen AT, Kleinman D, O’Malley MJ, Rozbruch SR. Joint preservation of the osteoarthritic ankle using distraction arthroplasty. Foot Ankle Int. 2009; 30(4):318-25. 12. Intema F, Thomas TP, Anderson DD, Elkins JM, Brown TD, Amendola A, et al. Subchondral bone remodeling is related to clinical improvement after joint distraction in the treatment of ankle osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2011; 19(6):668-75. 13. Saltzman CL, Hillis SL, Stolley MP, Anderson DD, Amendola A. Motion versus fixed distraction of the joint in the treatment of ankle osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012; 94(11):961-70. 14. Marijnissen AC, Hoekstra MC, Pré BC, van Roermund PM, van Melkebeek J, Amendola A, et al. Patient characteristics as predictors of clinical outcome of distraction in treatment of severe ankle osteoarthritis. J Orthop Res. 2014; 32(1):96-101. 15. Nguyen MP, Pedersen DR, Gao Y, Saltzman CL, Amendola A. Intermediate-term follow-up after ankle distraction for treatment of end-stage osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015; 97(7):590-6. 16. Fragomen AT, McCoy TH, Meyers KN, Rozbruch SR. Minimum distraction gap: how much ankle joint space is enough in ankle distraction arthroplasty? HSS J. 2014; 10(1):6-12. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 917 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 1,085 |
||