Subtalar arthroscopic arthrodesis: Technique and outcomes

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fas.2015.11.007Get rights and content

Highlights

  • This is the larger series of posterior subtalar arthroscopic arthrodesis publish.

  • We analyze the outcomes comparing with the literature.

  • The posterior hindfoot arthroscopy is a safe and reproducible technique.

  • All the patients were operated on by a single surgeon.

Abstract

Purpose

The goal of this study was to describe the surgical technique and our results with arthroscopic posterior subtalar arthrodesis.

Material and Methods

Retrospective case series of 65 patients (38 men and 27 women) averaging 50 years of age (range 21–72 years) undergoing posterior arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis using one or two percutaneous 6.5–7.3 mm screws between May 2004 and February 2011, with a mean follow-up of 57.5 months (range 24–105 months).

Results

We achieved a 95.4% union rate after an average of 12.1 weeks (range 9 to 16 weeks). 12.3% of patients suffered complications, including superficial infection, nonunion and need for hardware removal. The AOFAS score improved from 51.5 points (19–61 points) preoperatively to 81.9 points (60–94 points) in the postoperative period.

Conclusions

We describe the surgical technique for arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis, which as proven to be a safe and reliable technique in our experience, with consistent improvements in AOFAS scores.

Introduction

Subtalar arthrodesis is the fusion of the talo-calcaneal joint. Initially described by van Stockum [36] in 1912, Gallie later popularized it for the treatment of comminuted calcaneal fractures [16]. This procedure is performed to relieve pain during movement of the subtalar joint, and is indicated in patients suffering from posttraumatic osteoarthritis following fractures of the calcaneus or of the talus, or due to primary subtalar osteoarthritis, adult-acquired flatfoot deformity (AAFD) with posterior tibial tendon dysfunction (PTTD), congenital deformities (i.e. tarsal coalitions), neuromuscular dysfunction or inflammatory disease. Open techniques entail the removal of periarticular ligaments and the potential of neurovascular injury and skin breakdown due to surgical dissection. Nonunion rates up to 30% have been reported among some patient subgroups, and bone graft is commonly used in order to improve chances of fusion [6], [9], [13], [15], [19], [24], [34], [39].

Minimally invasive techniques such as arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis were developed to improve the results of traditional open methods, with the theoretical advantages of preserving the blood supply to the tarsus, reducing postoperative morbidity, and potentially preserving proprioception. The first cadaveric description of subtalar joint arthroscopy corresponds to Parisien and Vangness in 1985 [32], and Tasto first described arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis in 1992 [37]. Few investigators have published mid-term results of this technique, and the published series are limited to a small number of cases [1], [2], [5], [11], [14], [17], [26], [28], [35]. The goal of our study was to report our midterm results with posterior arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis with the patient in the prone position and without addition bone graft, and to compare our results with those previously published in the literature.

Section snippets

Material and methods

We performed a retrospective review of prospectively captured data on all patients who had undergone posterior arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis between May 2004 and February 2011. The same surgeon (JVR) performed all the procedures. Inclusion criteria were: (1) patients who underwent arthroscopic arthrodesis performed by a posterior approach with fixation by means one or two 6.5 mm or 7.3 mm-diameter cannulated screws; (2) with a minimum 24 month clinical and radiological follow-up, and (3)

Surgical technique

Arthroscopic posterior arthrodesis of the subtalar joint was performed under intradural anesthesia in the prone position, after applying a pneumatic tourniquet to the thigh, and a small support to the leg, allowing for free movement of the ankle. We did not apply any distraction or previous distension of the joint. The joint was accessed through two posterior endoscopic portals as described by van Dijk [12] [33], using a 4.5 mm 30° arthroscope. The posterolateral portal was performed first

Results

Patient characteristics and results are summarized in Table 1. Most fusions were indicated in patients with posttraumatic arthritis due to sequelae of thalamic fractures of the calcaneus (37 cases, 56.9%). Patients with adult acquired flatfoot deformity with PTTD (24 cases, 36.9%) made up the second largest group. Four patients were treated for primary isolated subtalar osteoarthritis (OA) (6.2%). Patients with posttraumatic arthritis tended to be younger (38.2 years) and predominantly male

Discussion

Posttraumatic arthritis, instability, hindfoot misalignment, inflammatory and congenital disorders can all lead to pain in the subtalar joint. Isolated posterior subtalar arthrodesis is the method of choice for treating this condition, if the other joints are not affected. Its main objective is to eliminate pain and to allow for more mobility and less morbidity than with other procedures, such as a triple arthrodesis [38].

The overall reported results of open subtalar arthrodesis have been

Conclusion

Arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis has proven to offer at least similar results, and may achieve higher rates of fusion and lower complication rates than open techniques. We prove it is a safe and reliable procedure, provided surgical technique is carefully followed. It provides a high union rate without needing supplementation by bone graft, with an acceptable rate of complications. AOFAS scores improved significantly in all of our patients, and patient satisfaction was high even among patients

Ethical Approval

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Conflicts of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

None of the authors has any conflict of interest to disclose.

No benefits in any form have been received or will be received by the authors from a commercial party, directly or indirectly, related to the subject herein.

References (39)

  • G.J.M. Tuijthof et al.

    Overview of subtalar arthrodesis techniques: Options, pitfalls and solutions

    Foot Ankle Surg

    (2010)
  • A. Amendola et al.

    Technique and early experience with posterior arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis

    Foot Ankle Int

    (2007)
  • L. Beimers et al.

    A 3-portal approach for arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis

    Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Off J ESSKA

    (2009)
  • A. Carranza-Bencano et al.

    Isolated subtalar arthrodesis through minimal incision surgery

    Foot Ankle Int

    (2013)
  • L.P. Carro et al.

    Arthroscopic Subtalar Arthrodesis: The Posterior Approach in the Prone Position

    Arthrosc J Arthrosc Relat Surg

    (2007)
  • J. Chahal et al.

    Factors associated with outcome after subtalar arthrodesis

    J Orthop Trauma

    (2006)
  • B. Chuckpaiwong et al.

    Screw placement in subtalar arthrodesis: a biomechanical study

    Foot Ankle Int

    (2009)
  • M.J. Coughlin et al.

    Comparison of radiographs and CT scans in the prospective evaluation of the fusion of hindfoot arthrodesis

    Foot Ankle Int

    (2006)
  • D.L. Dahm et al.

    Subtalar arthrodesis with internal compression for post-traumatic arthritis

    J Bone Joint Surg Br

    (1998)
  • Cited by (12)

    • Lateral Hind-Foot Endoscopic Anterolateral/Posterolateral (LEAP) Subtalar Arthrodesis: An Effective Minimally Invasive Technique to Achieve Subtalar Fusion and Deformity Correction

      2021, Arthroscopy Techniques
      Citation Excerpt :

      Once reduced, the foot is dorsiflexed to naturally lock it in the reduced position. The subtalar joint is stabilized using a 2-screw technique with 6.5-mm partially threaded cannulated screws inserted in a vertically parallel configuration6 (Fig 7). The accurate placement of the screws is confirmed by the use of image intensifier.

    • Effectiveness of subtalar arthroereisis with endorthesis for pediatric flexible flat foot: a retrospective cross-sectional study with final follow up at skeletal maturity

      2020, Foot and Ankle Surgery
      Citation Excerpt :

      In our population, the implants have been bilaterally removed in two cases because of personal discomfort, 38 and 28 months after the indexed surgery, with symptoms resolution following implants removal. Arthroereisis has been claimed to reduce peritalar stress and to induce restoration of function; where complications do arise, removal of the implant appears to usually leads to uncomplicated recovery [13]. Nevertheless, further studies with long-term follow-up are needed to completely understand the clinical impact during the adulthood of a long-lasting subtalar implant.

    • Subtalar Arthroscopic Fusion

      2018, Foot and Ankle Clinics
      Citation Excerpt :

      The reason behind trying an arthroscopic approach is to preserve the blood supply to the talus, to reduce postoperative morbidity, and it is hoped, to obtain better results. It was first described in 1985, and later, successful results have been published by others.6 The time to union and time to return to activities of daily living, sports, and work are shorter after arthroscopic approaches when compared with open ones.7

    • Arthroscopic posterior subtalar arthrodesis for salvage of posttraumatic arthritis following calcaneal fractures

      2018, Injury
      Citation Excerpt :

      Arthroscopy of the hindfoot and ankle has progressed greatly in the past 3 decades, leading to less invasive surgical procedures, among them subtalar arthrodesis. Several published series have proven the safety and efficacy of posterior arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis, but most include patients with varied indications, posttraumatic as well as non-traumatic [6–15]. The goal of this study is to evaluate the results of a series of patients treated with posterior subtalar arthrodesis for posttraumatic arthritis following a calcaneal fracture, and compare them with the body of evidence for this procedure and indication.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text