Advertisement

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery

, Volume 134, Issue 10, pp 1361–1368 | Cite as

Failure modes for total ankle arthroplasty: a statistical analysis of the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register

  • Patrick SadoghiEmail author
  • Grant Roush
  • Norbert Kastner
  • Andreas Leithner
  • Christof Sommitsch
  • Tarun Goswami
Orthopaedic Surgery

Abstract

Background

It is imperative to understand the most common failure modes of total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) to appropriately allocate the resources, healthcare costs, enhancing surgical treatment methods, and improve design and longevity of the implant. The objective of this study was to investigate the primary mode or modes of failure (Loose talar component, loose tibial component, dislocation, instability, misalignment, deep infection, Fracture (near implant), Pain, defect polyethylene (PE), other, and missing information) of TAA implants, so these failure mode/modes can be targeted for future improvement.

Methods

The Norwegian Total Hip Arthroplasty Register 2008 was chosen as the primary source of data since the register have been in existence for 20 years and also gives more specific failure modes than other registries. Tukey–Kramer method was applied to Norwegian Arthroplasty Register.

Results

After the application of the Tukey–Kramer method, it is evident that there is no significant difference between any of the failure modes that are pertinent to the ankle. However, there is significant evidence that the number of ankle arthroplasties are increasing with time.

Conclusions

Since there is no statistical evidence showing which failure mode contributes most to revision surgeries, it is concluded that more information/data is needed to further investigate failure modes in ankle arthroplasties. Since the numbers of such surgeries are increasing, sufficient data should become available in time.

Keywords

Total ankle arthroplasty Failure mode Statistical analysis Register data 

References

  1. 1.
    Jensen NC, Linde F (2008) Long-term follow-up on 33 TPR ankle joint replacements in 26 patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Foot Ankle Surg. doi: 10.1016/j.fas.2008.08.009 Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Michael JM, Golshani A, Gargac S, Goswami T (2008) Biomechanics of the ankle joint and clinical outcomes of total ankle replacement. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 1(4):276–294PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cerrato R, Myerson MS (2008) Total ankle replacement: the agility LP prothesis. Foot Ankle Clin 13(3):485–494PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Henne TD, Anderson JG (2002) Total ankle arthroplasty: a historical perspective. Foot Ankle Clin 7(4):695–702PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jackson MP, Singh D (2003) Total ankle replacement. Current Orthopaedics 17:292–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kitaoka HB, Patzer GL (1996) Clinical results of the mayo total ankle arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg 78:1658–1664Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sadoghi P, Schröder C, Fottner A, Steinbrück A, Betz O, Müller PE, Jansson V, Hölzer A (2012) Application and survival curve of total hip arthroplasties: a systematic comparative analysis using worldwide hip arthroplasty registers. Int Orthop 36(11):2197–2203PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Myerson MS, Miller SD (2002) Salvage after complications of total ankle arthroplasty. Foot Ankle Clin 7:191–206PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Anderson T, Montgomery F, Carlsson A (2003) Uncemented STAR total ankle prostheses: three to eight year follow-up of fifty-one consecutive ankles. J Bone Jt Surg Am 85(7):1321–1329Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harris NJ, Brooke BT, Sturdee S (2009) A wear debris cyst following S.T.A.R. total ankle replacement—surgical management. Foot Ankle Surg 15:43–45PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Murnaghan JM, Warnock DS, Henderson SA (2005) Total ankle replacement. Early experiences with STAR prosthesis. Ulster Med J 74:9–13PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kopp FJ, Patel MM, Deland JT, O’Malley MJ (2006) Total ankle arthroplasty with the agility prosthesis: clinical and radiographic evaluation. Foot Ankle Int 27:97–103PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Thordarson DB, Ahlmann E, Shepherd LE et al (2000) Sepsis and osteomyelitis about the ankle joint. Foot Ankle Clin 5:913–928PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Furnes O, Havelin LI, Espehaug B, Fenstad AM, Steindal K (2008) The Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. Report 2008. ISBN-0809-9405. ISBN- 978-82-91847-13-9. Bergen, Norway: 2008. pp 59–62Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Henricson A, Skoog A, Carlsson A (2007) The Swedish ankle arthroplasty register: an analysis of 531 arthroplasties between 1993 and 2005. Acta Orthop 78(5):569–574PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sadoghi P, Liebensteiner M, Agreiter M, Leithner A, Böhler N, Labek G (2013) Revision surgery after total joint arthroplasty: a complication-based analysis using worldwide arthroplasty registers. J Arthroplasty 28(8):1329–1332PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Montgomery DC (2008) Design and Analysis of Experiments. Wiley. 7th ed. 2008Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Conti SF, Wong YS (2001) Complications of total ankle replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 391:105–114PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bullens P, de Waal Malefijt M, Louwerens JW (2010) Conversion of failed ankle arthroplasty to an arthrodesis. Technique using an arthrodesis nail and a cage filled with morsellized bone graft. Foot Ankle Surg 16(2):101–104PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Reggiani B, Leardini A, Corazza F, Taylor M (2006) Finite element analysis of a total ankle replacement during the stance phase of gait. J Biomech 39:1435–1443PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Vielgut I, Kastner N, Pichler K, Holzer L, Glehr M, Gruber G, Leithner A, Labek G, Sadoghi P (2013) Application and surgical technique of total knee arthroplasties: a systematic comparative analysis using worldwide registers. Int Orthop 28(8):1329–1332Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Myerson MS, Mroczek K (2003) Perioperative complications of total ankle arthroplasty. Foot Ankle Int 24(1):17–21PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Groth HE, Fitch HF (1987) Salvage procedures for complications of total ankle arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 224:244–250PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Muir DC, Amendola A, Saltzman CL (2002) Long-term outcome of ankle arthrodesis. Foot Ankle Clin 7:703–708PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick Sadoghi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Grant Roush
    • 2
  • Norbert Kastner
    • 1
  • Andreas Leithner
    • 1
  • Christof Sommitsch
    • 3
  • Tarun Goswami
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryMedical University of GrazGrazAustria
  2. 2.Biomedical Industrial and Human Factors EngineeringWright State UniversityDaytonUSA
  3. 3.Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Economic SciencesTechnical University of GrazGrazAustria

Personalised recommendations