scholarly journals Mini-open vs. Transfibular Approach for Ankle Arthrodesis, Which Approach is Superior in Joint Preparation: A Cadaver Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karthikeyan Chinnakkannu ◽  
Haley M. McKissack ◽  
Jun Kit He ◽  
Bradley Alexander ◽  
John Wilson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ankle Arthrodesis ◽  
Cadaver Study ◽  
Joint Preparation ◽  
Mini Open

scholarly journals Miniopen vs Lateral Approach for Ankle Arthrodesis, Which Approach is Superior in Joint Preparation: A Cadaver Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 2473011419S0013
Author(s):  
Karthikeyan Chinnakkannu ◽  
Haley McKissack ◽  
Gean C. Viner ◽  
Jun Kit He ◽  
Leonardo V. M. Moraes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surface Area ◽  
Ankle Arthrodesis ◽  
Lateral Approach ◽  
Fixation Method ◽  
Open Approach ◽  
Ankle Arthritis ◽  
Joint Preparation ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
In Trans ◽  
Mini Open

Category: Ankle, Ankle Arthritis, Arthroscopy, Basic Sciences/Biologics Introduction/Purpose: Ankle arthrodesis is a gold standard for end-stage ankle arthritis after conservative managements fail. It may be done through direct anterior, lateral, arthroscopic or mini open approaches. Joint preparation, apposition of joint surfaces and stable fixation are very important for successful outcomes. Ankle arthrodesis maybe associated with infection, chronic pain and nonunion - of these, nonunion is the most common complication reported. Achieving union is of utmost importance while minimizing complications associated with the procedure. Regardless of approach or fixation method, preparation of articular surface is of paramount importance for successful union and may be limited by the approach used. Our study aims to evaluate the difference between direct lateral and dual mini-open approaches (extended arthroscopic portals) in terms of joint preparation. Methods: We used 10 below knee fresh-frozen cadaver legs for this cadaveric study. Ankle joints of five specimens were prepared through the lateral approach, while the remaining five ankles were prepared using dual mini incisions. After the completion of preparation, all ankles were dissected to open, photographic images of tibial plafond and talar articular were taken. Surface areas of each articular facet and unprepared cartilage of the talus, distal tibia, and distal fibula were measured and analyzed using ImageJ software. Results: Significantly greater amount of total surface area was prepared among specimens using mini-open approach compared to those with trans-fibular approach. The percentage of total articulating surface area prepared (including talus and tibia/fibula), talus, tibia and fibula in trans-fibular approach were 76.9%, 77.7% and 75% respectively. The percentages were 90.9%, 92.9%, and 88.6% in mini-open approach. While the medial gutter was well prepared with mini incision technique (unprepared surface 44 .64% vs 91.08%), lateral gutter was well prepared in trans-fibular technique (88.82vs 82.04 square cm). There is no difference in the amount of unprepared surface of talar dome between the two approaches. When excluding the medial gutter, there was no significant difference between trans-fibular and mini open techniques (83.94 vs 90.85, p=0.1412). Conclusion: Joint preparation using the mini-open approach (extended arthroscopic portal) is equally as efficacious as the transfibular approach for preparation of the tibiotalar joint. When including preparation of the medial gutter, the mini-open approach provides superior joint preparation. This may be advantageous with decreased rate of nonunion and less complications. But many surgeons fuse only tibiotalar surface, considering that, both approaches yield equal amount of joint preparation. But it needs to be confirmed with clinical studies.

Mini-Open Arthroscopically Assisted Bristow-Latarjet Procedure for the Treatment of Patients With Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Cadaver Study

2006 ◽  
Vol 22 (10) ◽  
pp. 1113-1118 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geoffroy Nourissat ◽  
Guillaume Nedellec ◽  
Niamh A. O’Sullivan ◽  
Aurore Debet-Mejean ◽  
Christian Dumontier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Cadaver Study ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Latarjet Procedure ◽  
Arthroscopically Assisted ◽  
Mini Open

Posterolateral plate fixation with Talarlock® is more stable than screw fixation in ankle arthrodesis in a biomechanical cadaver study

2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 208-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Gutteck ◽  
H. Martin ◽  
T. Hanke ◽  
J.B. Matthies ◽  
A. Heilmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Screw Fixation ◽  
Plate Fixation ◽  
Ankle Arthrodesis ◽  
Cadaver Study

Efficacy of a Cellular Bone Allograft for Foot and Ankle Arthrodesis and Revision Nonunion Procedures

2016 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 277-282 ◽  
Author(s):  
Travis J. Dekker ◽  
Peter White ◽  
Samuel B. Adams
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Bone Allograft ◽  
Ankle Arthrodesis ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Union Rate ◽  
Joint Preparation ◽  
History Of ◽  
Cellular Bone ◽  
Cellular Bone Allograft

Background: Bone graft substitutes are often required in patients at risk for nonunion, and therefore, an allograft that most closely mimics an autograft is highly sought after. This study explored the utility and efficacy of a cellular bone allograft used for foot and ankle arthrodesis and revision nonunion procedures in a patient population at risk for nonunion. Methods: An institutional review board–approved retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent arthrodesis and revision nonunion procedures with a cellular bone allograft was performed at a single academic institution. No external sources of funding were provided for this study. Inclusion criteria included patients who were more than 1 year after surgery or less than 1 year after surgery if they had undergone a second operative procedure for nonunion or if they had computed tomography–documented union. Forty operative procedures in 36 patients with a mean follow-up of 13 months (range, 6-25 months) were included for data analysis. All patients had at least one of the following risk factors associated with nonunion: current smoker, diabetes, avascular necrosis (AVN) of the involved bone, active same-site operative infection, history of nonunion, previous same-site surgery, or gap of 5 mm or greater after joint preparation. The primary outcome was radiographic union. Results: The union rate in this high-risk population was 83% (33/40). Univariate analysis demonstrated that the use of a cellular bone allograft helped mitigate the presence of risk factors known to cause nonunion. There was no significant difference in fusion rates among groups with current smoking, AVN of the involved bone, active same-site operative infections, history of nonunion, rheumatoid arthritis on medication, previous same-site operative procedures or infections, or a gap of 5 mm or greater after joint preparation. However, in this population, diabetic and female patients remained at a high risk of recurrent nonunion ( P = .0015), despite the use of a cellular bone allograft. Chi-square analysis of patients with increasing numbers of risk factors directly correlated with an increased risk of nonunion ( P = .025). Four wound complications were reported in this cohort that required irrigation and debridement (10%). Conclusion: These data demonstrated a union rate of 83% in patients with risk factors known to cause nonunion. The benefits of the use of a cellular bone allograft allowed for the avoidance of morbidity associated with autograft harvesting while still improving the local biology to facilitate fusion in a difficult patient population to attain a successful fusion mass. Level of Evidence: Level IV, retrospective case series.

scholarly journals Outcome Comparison of Arthroscopic versus Mini-open Technique for Ankle Arthrodesis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Junliang Wang ◽  
WENPING GE ◽  
WENSHAN HU ◽  
FENG LIN ◽  
YUJIE LIU
Keyword(s):  
Length Of Hospital Stay ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Fusion Rate ◽  
Ankle Arthrodesis ◽  
Open Group ◽  
Tourniquet Time ◽  
Vas Score ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
End Stage ◽  
Mini Open

Abstract Background Ankle arthrodesis is considered to be the gold standard for the treatment of end-stage ankle diseases. At present, the commonly used methods of ankle arthrodesis include open ankle arthrodesis, arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis and mini-open ankle arthrodesis. The authors analyze and compare the clinical efficacy and related complications of arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis and mini-open ankle arthrodesis in the treatment of end-stage ankle disease. Methods From January 2007 to June 2018, 56 patents with end-stage ankle joint pathology were treated with arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis and mini-open ankle arthrodesis. There were 30 cases in arthroscopy group, including 19 males and 11 females with an average age of 49.6 years old (ranged, 32 to 71); while 26 cases in mini-open group, including 18 males and 8 females with an average age of 48.3 years old (ranged, 43 to 65). The operative time was calculated with use of computerized operative and anesthetic records. The pain visual analogue score (VAS), American Orthopedic Foot ༆ Ankle Society ankle and hind foot score (AOFAS), fusion rate, complications rate, length of hospital stay, operation time, and tourniquet time were compared between the two groups of patients. Results 51 patients were followed up for 15–35 months (mean, 22.5 ± 1.5) months. The bony fusion was achieved in all patients. The average time to fusion was 12.4 weeks (range, 10–16 weeks). The VAS score 3 days post-operation was (6.37 ± 0.69) points in the arthroscopy group and (7.61 ± 1.05) points in the mini-open group, there was significant difference between the two groups (P < 0.05). The VAS score and AOFAS score between the two groups pre- and post-operation have statistically significant differences (P < 0.05). At the last follow-up, VAS score was (1.55 ± 0.57) in the arthroscopy group and (1.43 ± 0.73) in the mini-open group, and there was no significant difference between the two groups (P > 0.05). The AOFAS score was (85.32 ± 2.96) points in the arthroscopy group and (86.72 ± 3.05) points in the mini-open group, and there was no significant difference between the two groups (P > 0.05). Arthroscopic ankle fusion was associated with a shorter tourniquet time and shorter length of hospital stay compared to mini-open ankle fusion (P < 0.05); however, there was no significant difference between two groups in terms of operation time (P > 0.05). Wounds healing was satisfying during the follow-up in the arthroscopy group. But the wounds healing was delayed in two patients of the small incision group. All patients were satisfied with the surgery. Conclusion Arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis and mini-open ankle arthrodesis have satisfactory curative effect and fusion rate. Arthroscopic assisted ankle arthrodesis has more advantages, including small incision, less injury, and low morbidity.

Which surgical approach is optimal for joint preparation in talonavicular fusion – a cadaver study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas A. Andrews ◽  
David A. Patch ◽  
Timothy W. Torrez ◽  
Charles R. Sutherland ◽  
Whitt M. Harrelson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Approach ◽  
Cadaver Study ◽  
Joint Preparation

Subtalar joint preparation using the Two Portal posterior arthroscopic technique versus the sinus tarsi Open approach: A cadaver study

The Foot ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 46 ◽  
pp. 101690
Author(s):  
Karthikeyan Chinnakkannu ◽  
Haley McKissack ◽  
Bradley Alexander ◽  
Aaradhana J Jha ◽  
Martim Pinto ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Subtalar Joint ◽  
Cadaver Study ◽  
Open Approach ◽  
Arthroscopic Technique ◽  
Joint Preparation ◽  
Sinus Tarsi

scholarly journals Joint Preparation and Ray Shortening in Arthroscopic Versus Open First Metatarsophalangeal Fusion: A Cadaver Study

Cureus ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haley McKissack ◽  
Bradley Alexander ◽  
Gean C Viner ◽  
Eildar Abyar ◽  
Nicholas A Andrews ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cadaver Study ◽  
Joint Preparation
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document