Double Versus Triple Arthrodesis Fusion Rates: A Systematic Review.

Hindfoot arthrodesis is often required for end-staged deformities, such as posterior tibial tendon dysfunction, osteoarthritis, or rheumatoid arthritis. Although the need for hindfoot arthrodesis is generally accepted in severe deformities, there is a debate whether a double or triple arthrodesis should be performed. The aim of our systematic review is to review the fusion rates and mean time to fusion in double and triple arthrodesis. A total of 184 articles were identified using the keyword search through the database of articles published from 2005 to 2017. After review by 3 physicians, a total of 13 articles met the eligibility criteria. The reason for double or triple arthrodesis within the studies were posterior tibial tendon dysfunction, tarsal coalition, degenerative joint disease, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, Charcot Marie Tooth, Multiple Sclerosis, Polio, neuromuscular disorder, cerebral palsy, acrodystrophic neuropathy, clubfoot, post-traumatic, and seronegative arthropathy (spondyloarthritis). Within these 13 studies, there were a total of 343 (6-95) subjects extremities operated on. The overall fusion rate for double arthrodesis was 91.75% (289/315) compared to 92.86% (26/28) triple arthrodesis fusion rate, p value .8370. The mean time to fusion for double arthrodesis was 17.96 ± 7.96 weeks compared to 16.70 ± 8.18 weeks for triple arthrodesis, p value = .8133. There are risks associated with triple arthrodesis including increased surgical times, lateral wound complications, residual deformity, surgical costs and peri-articular arthritis. Given the benefits of double arthrodesis over triple arthrodesis and the nearly equivalent fusion rates and time to fusion, double arthrodesis is an effective alternative to triple arthrodesis. The authors of this systematic review recommend double arthrodesis as the hindfoot fusion procedure of choice.

Ankle Disarticulation: An Underutilized Approach to Staged Below Knee Amputation-Case Series and Surgical Technique.

The staged approach to below knee amputation has proven to be an effective method of achieving functionality after amputation and reducing risk for postamputation complications. Transtibial or "guillotine" amputations are often used as the first-stage amputation. Disarticulation at the ankle joint is an alternative method that can be used with favorable results and benefits. These include rapid infection decompression while minimizing the blood loss of traditional tibial osteotomy. Here we describe our operative technique, perioperative management, and indications for this surgical procedure.

Outcomes in Drainage Ankle Disarticulation vs Guillotine Transtibial Amputation in the Staged Approach to Below-Knee Amputation.

A transtibial amputation is the traditional primary staged amputation for source control in the setting of non-salvageable lower extremity infection, trauma, or avascularity prior to progression to proximal amputation. The primary aim of the study is to compare preoperative risk factors and postoperative outcomes between patients who underwent transtibial amputation versus ankle disarticulation in staged amputations. A retrospective review of 152 patients that underwent staged below the knee amputation were compared between those that primarily underwent transtibial amputation (N = 70) versus ankle disarticulation (N = 82). The mean follow-up for all 152 patients was 2.1 years (range = 0.04-7.9 years). The odds of incisional healing were 3.2 times higher for patients with guillotine amputation compared to patients with ankle disarticulation (odds ratio [OR] = 3.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.437-7.057). The odds of postoperative infection is 7.4 times higher with ankle disarticulation compared to patients with guillotine amputation (OR = 7.345, 95% CI = 1.505-35.834). There were improved outcomes in patients that underwent staged below the knee amputation with primarily guillotine transtibial amputation compared to primarily ankle disarticulation. Ankle disarticulation should be reserved for more distal infections, to allow for adequate infectious control, in the aims of decreasing postoperative infection and improving incisional healing rates.Levels of Evidence: 3, Retrospective study.

Surgical Treatment of Plantar First Metatarsal Ulcerations in High-Risk Patients: A Case Series.

BACKGROUND: Plantar first metatarsal ulcerations pose a difficult challenge to clinicians. Etiologies vary and include first metatarsal declination, cavus foot deformity, equinus contracture, and hallux limitus/rigidus. Our pragmatic, sequential approach to the multiple contributing etiologies of increased plantar pressure sub-first metatarsal can be addressed through minimal skin incisions. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed for patients with surgically treated preulcerations or ulcerations sub-first metatarsal head. All of the patients underwent a dorsiflexory wedge osteotomy, and the need for each additional procedure was independently assessed. Equinus contracture was treated with Achilles tendon lengthening, cavovarus deformity was mitigated with Steindler stripping, and plantarflexed first ray was treated with dorsiflexory wedge osteotomy. RESULTS: Eight patients underwent our pragmatic, sequential approach for increased plantar pressure sub-first metatarsal, four with preoperative ulcerations and four with preoperative hyperkeratotic preulcerative lesions. The preoperative ulcerations were present for an average of 25.43 weeks (range, 6.00-72.86 weeks), with an average size of 0.19 cm3 (median, 0.04 cm3). Procedure breakdown was as follows: eight first metatarsal osteotomies, four Achilles tendon lengthenings, and six Steindler strippings. Postoperatively, all eight patients returned to full ambulation, and the four ulcerations healed at an average of 24 days (range, 15-38 days). New ulceration occurred in one patient, and postoperative infection occurred in one patient. There were no ulceration recurrences, dehiscence of surgical sites, or minor or major amputations. CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes in patients surgically treated for increased plantar first metatarsal head pressure were evaluated. This case series demonstrates that our pragmatic, sequential approach yields positive results. In diabetic or high-risk patients, it is our treatment algorithm of choice for increased plantar first metatarsal pressure.