Clinical Outcomes of Ankle Distraction Arthroplasty Versus Supramalleolar Osteotomy [post]

Zongyu Yang, Liang Cui, Shiwu Tao, Li Wang, Fengqi Zhang, Jianyong Zhao, Xinzhong Shao
2021 unpublished
BackgroundPost-traumatic ankle arthritis is increasing in young people and it is very important to preserve the ankle range of motion in young patients. This study aimed to compare ankle distraction arthroplasty versus supramalleolar osteotomy for post-traumatic ankle arthritis.MethodsThis retrospective study reviewed 32 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for post-traumatic ankle arthritis from January 2015 to December 2018 after failure of conservative treatment. Thirteen ankles that
more » ... derwent ankle distraction arthroplasty were age-, sex-, and body mass index-matched with 19 ankles that underwent supramalleolar osteotomy. Patients returned for clinical and radiologic follow-up at an average of 32 (range, 24–48) months postoperatively. Outcomes were the comparison of the pre- and postoperative Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scores and American Orthopedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot scores, complications, subjective patient-rated satisfaction, and ankle function.ResultsThe VAS and AOFAS scores of the two groups were significantly improved at final follow-up compared with preoperatively (p<0.05), but did not significantly differ between groups. The ankle distraction arthroplasty group had better postoperative ankle mobility than the supramalleolar osteotomy group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the tibial anterior surface angle, talar tilt angle, tibial lateral surface angle, and other imaging parameters, but supramalleolar osteotomy was more effective in correcting the load-bearing line of the ankle and hindfoot. The complication rate was similar in both groupsConclusionsAnkle distraction arthroplasty and supramalleolar osteotomy both achieved good pain relief and improved function in patients with traumatic ankle arthritis.Level of evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative series.
doi:10.21203/ fatcat:rzd6fr7ogvg53ndzusv2roag2y