Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The influence of talonavicular versus double arthrodesis on load dependent motion of the midtarsal joint

  • Orthopaedic Surgery
  • Published:
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Today the most frequently used operative procedures in advanced arthritis of the hindfoot joints are isolated talonavicular arthrodesis and double arthrodesis (involving the talonavicular and calcaneocuboid joints, i.e. the Chopart joint). This in vitro study investigates whether the fusion of the talonavicular joint alone can provide the hindfoot, as well as a midfoot, with comparable biomechanical stability as the double arthrodesis does. Hence with the less-invasive intervention the same benefit in terms of pain reduction and better functionality could be achieved.

Methods

In a series of ten fresh cadaver feet without any radiological pathologies, we measured the range of motion of different tarsal bones in three planes under axial stress. Every foot was loaded without arthrodesis, after talonavicular and after double arthrodesis, by charging tibia and fibula with a force of 350 N using a calibrated Instron® load frame. Each tarsal bone was marked with a K-wire and its motion was measured by registering the movement of the wire’s shade that was projected onto the surrounding walls of the trial box.

Results

Both operative procedures led to a considerable reduction of the motion of every marked bone to a mean of 18% of the preoperative value. In direct comparison of the two simulated arthrodeses we found for every bone and in every plane only minimal differences of the mean excursions of 1.0 mm on average. Both fusions lead to equal residual tarsal bone motion postoperatively, and provide the midtarsal joint as well as the subtalar joint with comparable biomechanical stability.

Conclusions

Isolated talonavicular arthrodesis is a useful and effective alternative to double arthrodesis. It is the less complicated, less-invasive and functionally equivalent operative option for arthritic alterations of the hindfoot and transverse tarsal joint.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Astion DJ, Deland JD, Otis JC, Kenneally SK (1997) Motion of the hindfoot after simulated arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 79:241–246

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1(8476):307–310

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bland JM, Altman DG (1999) Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res 8(2):135–160

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Chen CH, Huang PJ, Chen TB, Cheng YM, Lin SY, Chiang HC, Chen LC (2001) Isolated talonavicular arthrodesis for talonavicular arthritis. Foot Ankle Int 22(8):633–636

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Chiodo CP, Martin T, Wilson MG (2000) Technique for isolated arthrodesis for inflammatory arthritis of the talonavicular joint. Foot Ankle Int 21(4):307–311

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Donatto KC (1998) Arthritis and arthrodesis of the hindfoot. Clin Orthop 349:81–92

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Easley ME, Trnka HJ, Schon LC, Myerson MS (2000) Isolated subtalar arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82(5):613–624

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Fogel GR, Katoh Y, Rand JA, Chao EY (1982) Talonavicular arthrodesis for isolated arthrosis: 9.5-year results and gait analysis. Foot Ankle 3:105–113

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fortin PT (2001) Posterior tibial tendon insufficiency. Isolated fusion of the talonavicular joint. Foot Ankle Clin 6(1):137–151

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Imhäuser G (1978) Introduction. In: Steinhäuser J (ed) Die Arthrodesen der Chopart’schen Gelenklinie. Bücherei des Orthopäden, vol 20. Enke, Stuttgart, p VII

    Google Scholar 

  11. Mann R, Baumgarten M (1988) Subtalar fusion for isolated subtalar disorders. Clin Orthop 226:260–265

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Rammelt S, Marti RK, Zwipp H (2006) Arthrodese des Talonavikulargelenks. Orthopade 35:428–434

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Thordarson DB (2004) Fusion in posttraumatic foot and ankle reconstruction. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 12:322–333

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Weinheimer D (2004) Talonavicular arthrodesis. Clin Podiatr Med Surg 21(2):227–240

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Wirth CJ (2002) Fußarthrosen. In: Wirth CJ, Zichner L (eds) Orthopädie und orthopädische Chirurgie, Fuß. Thieme, Stuttgart, pp 620–662

    Google Scholar 

  16. Wülker N, Stukenborg C, Savory KM, Alfke D (2000) Hindfoot motion after isolated and combined arthrodesis: measurements in anatomic specimens. Foot Ankle Int 21:921–927

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simon Thelen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Thelen, S., Rütt, J., Wild, M. et al. The influence of talonavicular versus double arthrodesis on load dependent motion of the midtarsal joint. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 130, 47–53 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-009-0878-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-009-0878-9

Keywords

Navigation