Advertisement

Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine

, Volume 6, Issue 4, pp 279–284 | Cite as

Total ankle arthroplasty in end-stage ankle arthritis

  • Constantine A. DemetracopoulosEmail author
  • James P. Halloran
  • Paul Maloof
  • Samuel B. AdamsJr
  • Selene G. Parekh
Foot and Ankle (SG Parekh, Section Editor)

Abstract

Recent advancements in ankle prosthesis design, combined with improved surgical techniques for correction of coronal plane deformity and ligamentous balancing, have led to a resurgence of interest in total ankle arthroplasty for the treatment of end-stage ankle arthritis. Although ankle arthrodesis has long been considered the gold standard treatment for ankle arthritis, recent studies have shown that patients who undergo total ankle replacement have equivalent pain relief and improved function, when compared with patients with an ankle fusion. The purpose of this review is to summarize the indications, advantages, disadvantages, and clinical outcomes of some of the more commonly used modern prostheses for total ankle arthroplasty.

Keywords

Ankle arthritis Total ankle arthroplasty Total ankle replacement Mobile bearing Fixed bearing 

Notes

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

Constantine A. Demetracopoulos, James P. Halloran, Paul Maloof, Samuel B. Adams, Jr., and Selene G. Parekh declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Glazebrook M, Daniels T, Younger A, Foote CJ, Penner M, Wing K, et al. Comparison of health-related quality of life between patients with end-stage ankle and hip arthrosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:499–505.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Saltzman CL, Zimmerman MB, O'Rourke M, Brown TD, Buckwalter JA, Johnston R. Impact of comorbidities on the measurement of health in patients with ankle osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:2366–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chou LB, Coughlin MT, Hansen Jr S, Haskell A, Lundeen G, Saltzman CL, et al. Osteoarthritis of the ankle: the role of arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2008;16:249–59.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vickerstaff JA, Miles AW, Cunningham JL. A brief history of total ankle replacement and a review of the current status. Med Eng Phys. 2007;29:1056–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bolton-Maggs BG, Sudlow RA, Freeman MA. Total ankle arthroplasty. A long-term review of the London Hospital experience. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1985;67:785–90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pappas M, Buechel FF, DePalma AF. Cylindrical total ankle joint replacement: surgical and biomechanical rationale. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1976;118:82–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Newton SE. An artificial ankle joint. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979;142:141–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fuentes-Sanz A, Moya-Angeler J, Lopez-Oliva F, Forriol F. Clinical outcome and gait analysis of ankle arthrodesis. Foot Ankle Int. 2012;33:819–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fuchs S, Sandmann C, Skwara A, Chylarecki C. Quality of life 20 years after arthrodesis of the ankle. A study of adjacent joints. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2003;85:994–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Buchner M, Sabo D. Ankle fusion attributable to posttraumatic arthrosis: a long-term followup of 48 patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;406:155–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Haddad SL, Coetzee JC, Estok R, Fahrbach K, Banel D, Nalysnyk L. Intermediate and long-term outcomes of total ankle arthroplasty and ankle arthrodesis. A systematic review of the literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:1899–905.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    •• Saltzman CL, Mann RA, Ahrens JE, Amendola A, Anderson RB, Berlet GC, et al. Prospective controlled trial of STAR total ankle replacement versus ankle fusion: initial results. Foot Ankle Int. 2009;30:579–96. This study was a prospective controlled trial comparing the STAR total ankle with ankle fusion for ankle arthritis. At 2-year follow-up, patients treated with the STAR total ankle had equal pain relief but improved function, when compared with patients who had an ankle fusion.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Coester LM, Saltzman CL, Leupold J, Pontarelli W. Long-term results following ankle arthrodesis for post-traumatic arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83-A:219–28.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    • SooHoo NF, Zingmond DS, Ko CY. Comparison of reoperation rates following ankle arthrodesis and total ankle arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:2143–9. This study utilized the California hospital discharge database to compare patients who underwent ankle arthroplasty and ankle fusion. Patients with an ankle replacement were at an increased risk for reoperation but were found to have a decreased risk of requiring a subtalar fusion during the 10-year study period.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cracchiolo 3rd A, Deorio JK. Design features of current total ankle replacements: implants and instrumentation. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2008;16:530–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Reiley MA. INBONE total ankle replacement. Foot Ankle Spec. 2008;1:305–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    • Adams SB, Demetracopoulos CA, Queen RM, Easley ME, DeOrio JK, Nunley JA. Early to Mid-Term Outcomes of Fixed-Bearing Total Ankle Arthroplasty Using a Modular Intramedullary Tibial Component. AOFAS Summer Meeting, 2013. This is the first study which prospectively evaluates patients who underwent primary total ankle arthroplasty with the INBONE prosthesis. Implant survival was 94% at a mean of 3.7 years; however, 10% of patients required reoperation during the study period.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Devries JG, Scott RT, Berlet GC, Hyer CF, Lee TH, Deorio JK. Agility to INBONE: anterior and posterior approaches to the difficult revision total ankle replacement. Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2013;30:81–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    • Schweitzer KM, Adams SB, Viens NA, Queen RM, Easley ME, DeOrio JK, et al. Early prospective clinical results of a modern fixed-bearing total ankle arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95:1002–11. This is the first prospective study evaluating patients who underwent total ankle arthroplasty using the Salto-Talaris fixed-bearing implant available in the U.S. Implant survival was 96% at a mean follow-up of 2.8 years. All patients were noted to have significant improvement in pain and patient-reported outcome and functional scores.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bonnin M, Judet T, Colombier JA, Buscayret F, Graveleau N, Piriou P. Midterm results of the Salto total ankle prosthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;424:6–18.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bonnin M, Gaudot F, Laurent JR, Ellis S, Colombier JA, Judet T. The Salto total ankle arthroplasty: survivorship and analysis of failures at 7 to 11 years. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469:225–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    •• Nunley JA, Caputo AM, Easley ME, Cook C. Intermediate to long-term outcomes of the STAR Total Ankle Replacement: the patient perspective. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94:43–8. This study was the first to evaluate patient self-reported improvements in quality of life and function. Patients underwent a STAR total ankle replacement and were found to have significant improvement in pain, function, and quality of life at 5-year follow-up.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    •• Mann JA, Mann RA, Horton E. STAR ankle: long-term results. Foot Ankle Int. 2011;32:S473–84. This is a study on the long-term survivorship of the STAR prosthesis, the only mobile-bearing total ankle approved for use in the U.S. The authors reported a 91% implant survivorship at an average of 9.1 years postoperatively, and 92% of patients were satisfied with their outcome.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    • Brunner S, Barg A, Knupp M, Zwicky L, Kapron AL, Valderrabano V, et al. The Scandinavian total ankle replacement: long-term, eleven to fifteen-year, survivorship analysis of the prosthesis in seventy-two consecutive patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95:711–8. This study from a group in Switzerland reported their long-term results with the STAR prosthesis. In their study, they noted implant survival to be 70.7% at 10 years and 45.6% at 14 years.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Brodsky JW, Polo FE, Coleman SC, Bruck N. Changes in gait following the Scandinavian total ankle replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93:1890–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Haskell A, Mann RA. Perioperative complication rate of total ankle replacement is reduced by surgeon experience. Foot Ankle Int. 2004;25:283–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Anderson T, Montgomery F, Carlsson A. Uncemented STAR total ankle prostheses. Three to eight-year follow-up of fifty-one consecutive ankles. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85-A:1321–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bobyn JD, Hacking SA, Chan SP. Characterization of new porous tantalum biomaterial for reconstructive orthopaedics. AAOS Annual Meeting. 1999.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Constantine A. Demetracopoulos
    • 1
    Email author
  • James P. Halloran
    • 2
  • Paul Maloof
    • 3
  • Samuel B. AdamsJr
    • 4
  • Selene G. Parekh
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryDuke University Medical CenterDurhamUSA
  2. 2.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryDuke University Medical CenterDurhamUSA
  3. 3.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryDuke University Medical CenterDurhamUSA
  4. 4.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryDuke University Medical CenterDurhamUSA
  5. 5.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, North Carolina Orthopaedic ClinicDuke University Medical CenterDurhamUSA

Personalised recommendations