Skip to main content

Endoprothese bei Arthrose des oberen Sprunggelenks

Total ankle replacement in patients with osteoarthritis

Arthroskopie volume 24, pages 274–282 (2011)Cite this article

Zusammenfassung

Der endoprothetische Ersatz des oberen Sprunggelenks (OSG) hat in den letzten Jahren deutliche Fortschritte verzeichnet. Mit den Prothesentypen der neueren Generation werden in der aktuellen Literatur Überlebensraten von 92–95% nach 5 Jahren berichtet. Trotzdem sind die Probleme der OSG-Arthrose schwerwiegender als diejenigen des arthrotischen Knie- oder Hüftgelenks. Zum einen sind über 80% der Arthrosen am OSG posttraumatischen Ursprungs. Deshalb ist der Weichteilmantel oft von schlechter Qualität. Häufig haben sich die Geometrie des Gelenks sowie das Alignement des Rückfußes als Ganzes verändert. Zum andern sind die Patienten im Durchschnitt ca. 10 Jahre jünger als Patienten mit Knie- oder Hüftarthrose und haben deshalb auch einen höheren Aktivitätsanspruch.

In den letzten Jahren sind zahlreiche neue OSG-Prothesen-Designs auf dem Markt erschienen. Präzisere und verlässlichere Instrumente haben die Implantationstechniken verfeinert und sicherer gemacht. Dennoch sind die Erkennung und ausreichende Behandlung der Begleitprobleme der Schlüssel für den langfristigen Erfolg in der Sprunggelenkprothetik.

Abstract

There is no doubt that total ankle replacement has much improved in recent years. Most recent reports on current ankle prosthesis designs have shown prosthesis survival rates of 92–98% after 5 years. Nevertheless, the underlying problems of osteoarthritis of the ankle are more critical than those of the hip or knee. Firstly, posttraumatic osteoarthritis in the ankle joint accounts for approximately 80% of cases. The surrounding soft tissues are often of poor quality and bony geometry and alignment may have changed significantly. Secondly, the patients are on average approximately 10 years younger than those with knee or hip osteoarthritis and therefore have a higher activity level.

Many new ankle designs have been brought onto market in recent years and new implantation techniques and instruments may have made replacement surgery easier and more reliable. However, recognition and appropriate treatment of associated problems and pathologic processes within the hind foot complex are the key issue for long-term success in total ankle replacement.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2
Abb. 3
Abb. 4
Abb. 5
Abb. 6

Literatur

  1. Hintermann B (2005) Endoprothetik des Sprunggelenks: Historischer Überblick, aktuelle Therapiekonzepte und Entwicklungen. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York

  2. Brunner S, Knupp M, Hintermann B (2010) Total ankle replacement for the valgus unstable osteoarthritic ankle. Tech Foot Ankle 9(165):174

    Google Scholar 

  3. Kim BS, Lee JW (2010) Total ankle replacement for the vaus unstable osteoarthritic ankle. Tech Foot Ankle 9:157–167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Knupp M, Stufkens SA, Bolliger L et al (2010) Total ankle replacement and supramalleolar osteotomies for malaligned osteoarthritis ankle. Tech Foot Ankle 9:175–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Valderrabano V, Horisberger M, Russell I et al (2009) Etiology of ankle osteoarthritis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467(7):1800–1806

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lindsjo U, Danckwardt-Lilliestrom G, Sahlstedt B (1985) Measurement of the motion range in the loaded ankle. Clin Orthop Relat Res 199(199):68–71

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Saltzman CL, Khoury GY el (1995) The hindfoot alignment view. Foot Ankle Int 16(9):572–576

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Knupp M, Pagenstert GI, Barg A et al (2009) SPECT-CT compared with conventional imaging modalities for the assessment of the varus and valgus malaligned hindfoot. J Orthop Res 27(11):1461–1466

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hintermann B (2005) What the orthopaedic foot and ankle surgeon wants to know from MR imaging. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 9(3):260–271

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Barg A, Knupp M, Anderson AE, Hintermann B (2011) Total ankle replacement in obese patients: component stability, weight change, and functional outcome in 118 consecutive patients. Foot Ankle Int accepted for publication

  11. Kim BS, Knupp M, Zwicky L et al (2010) Total ankle replacement in association with hindfoot fusion: outcome and complications. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 92(11):1540–1547

    Google Scholar 

  12. Naal FD, Impellizzeri FM, Loibl M et al (2009) Habitual physical activity and sports participation after total ankle arthroplasty. Am J Sports Med 37(1):95–102

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hintermann B, Valderrabano V, Dereymaeker G, Dick W (2004) The HINTEGRA ankle: rationale and short-term results of 122 consecutive ankles. Clin Orthop Relat Res 424(424):57–68

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hintermann B, Barg A (2010) The HINTEGRA total ankle arthroplasty. In: Wiesel SW (ed) Operative techniques in orthopaedic surgery. Williams & Wilkins, pp 4022–4031

  15. Valderrabano V, Pagenstert G, Horisberger M et al (2006) Sports and recreation activity of ankle arthritis patients before and after total ankle replacement. Am J Sports Med 34(6):993–999

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kokkonen A, Ikavalko M, Tiihonen R et al (2011) High rate of osteolytic lesions in medium-term follow-up after the AES total ankle replacement. Foot Ankle Int 32(2):168–175

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gougoulias N, Khanna A, Maffulli N (2010) How successful are current ankle replacements? A systematic review of the literature. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(1):199–208

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Saltzman CL, Mann RA, Ahrens JE et al (2009) Prospective controlled trial of STAR total ankle replacement versus ankle fusion: initial results. Foot Ankle Int 30(7):579–596

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Coester LM, Saltzman CL, Leupold J, Pontarelli W (2001) Long-term results following ankle arthrodesis for post-traumatic arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 83-A(2):219–228

  20. Fuchs S, Sandmann C, Skwara A, Chylarecki C (2003) Quality of life 20 years after arthrodesis of the ankle. A study of adjacent joints. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 85(7):994–998

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor weist auf folgende Beziehung hin: er erhält Royalties für die Hintegra-Prothese von der Fa. Integra.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Klinik für Orthopädie und Traumatologie des Bewegungsapparates, Kantonsspital Liestal, Rheinstr. 26, CH-4410, Liestal, Schweiz

    B. Hintermann & A. Barg

Authors
  1. B. Hintermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Barg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to B. Hintermann.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hintermann, B., Barg, A. Endoprothese bei Arthrose des oberen Sprunggelenks. Arthroskopie 24, 274–282 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00142-010-0611-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00142-010-0611-2

Schlüsselwörter

  • Oberes Sprunggelenk (OSG)
  • Arthrose
  • Endoprothese
  • Weichteilmantel
  • Gelenkgeometrie

Keywords

  • Ankle
  • Arthritis
  • Prosthesis
  • Soft tissue cover
  • Joint geometry