Revision surgeries following ankle arthrodesis fixed with retrograde intramedullary nails affected by mechanical complications

Abstract

BACKGROUND: 25 percent of all musculoskeletal diseases that involve joints of the lower extremities accrues to ankle arthrosis. Late stages of this disease are indications for ankle arthrodesis. To date, surgeons who perform ankle arthrodesis do not agree about both the treatment technique for ankle articular surfaces and the method of their fixation, but other studies and our own observations suggest that 8 to 20 percent of the surgeries performed with retrograde locking rods lead to revision interventions due to the disorder of ankle ankylosis formation caused by mechanical complications associated with the implanted fixators (aseptic loosening of their parts, stress fracture of the intramedullary nail or locking screws, peri-implant tibia fracture).

CLINICAL CASES DESCRIPTION: The aim of this work was to study and demonstrate the results of revision surgical interventions performed for failed ankylosis after ankle arthrodesis with intramedullary rod fixation against the development of mechanical complications. Clinical observations of revision interventions for failed ankylosis of the ankle joint against the complications due to mechanical origin using a retrograde blockable intramedullary rod as the primary fixator were carried out. Our work presents the technology of revision surgical interventions in case of compromised processes of ankle joint bone block formation associated with aseptic loosening of the structural elements, stress fracture of the intramedullary rod and blocking screws, tibial peri-implant fracture.

CONCLUSION: Revision surgery for complications due to mechanical origin after ankle arthrodesis with intramedullary rod fixation requires an individual approach in each clinical case.

Keywords

revision arthrodesis / ankle joint / bone defect / intramedullary nail / case report

References

[1] Yezhov MYu. Foot. Degenerative and dystrophic diseases of the joints of the foot and ankle joint. Nizhniy Novgorod; 2011. 320 р. (In Russ).

[2] Ежов М.Ю. Стопа. Дегенеративно-дистрофические заболевания суставов стопы и голеностопного сустава. Нижний Новгород, 2011. 320 с.

[3] Omelchenko TN. Fractures of the ankles and fast-progressive osteoarthritis of the ankle joint: prevention and treatment. Orthopedics, traumatology and prosthetics. 2013;(4):35–40. (In Russ).

[4] Омельченко Т.Н. Переломы лодыжек и быстропрогрессирующий остеоартроз голеностопного сустава: профилактика и лечение // Ортопедия, травматология и протезирование. 2013. № 4. С. 35–40.

[5] Saltzman CL, Salamon ML, Blanchard GM, et al. Epidemiology of ankle arthritis: report of a consecutive series of 639 patients from a tertiary orthopaedic center. Iowa Orthop J. 2005;(25):44–46.

[6] Saltzman C.L., Salamon M.L., Blanchard G.M., et al. Epidemiology of ankle arthritis: report of a consecutive series of 639 patients from a tertiary orthopaedic center // Iowa Orthop J. 2005. № 25. P. 44–46.

[7] Gorbatov RO, Gorin VV, Pavlov DV, Malyshev EE. The сoncept of modern ankle joint arthrodesis in posttraumatic crusarthrosis, grade III–IV. Sovremennye tehnologii v medicine. 2016;8(3):64–74. (In Russ). doi: 10.17691/stm2016.8.3.07

[8] Горбатов Р.О., Горин В.В., Павлов Д.В., Малышев Е.Е. Концепция современного артродезирования голеностопного сустава при посттравматическом крузартрозе III–IV стадии // Современные технологии в медицине. 2016. Т. 8, № 3. С. 64–74. doi: 10.17691/stm2016.8.3.07

[9] Fomichev VA, Sorokin EP, Chugaev DV. Ankle fusion is the optimal surgery for treatment of ankle arthritis (review). Department of Traumatology and Orthopedics. 2019;4(38):18–26. (In Russ). doi: 10.17238/issn2226-2016.2019.4.18-26

[10] Фомичев В.А., Сорокин Е.П., Чугаев Д.В., и др. Артродезирование голеностопного сустава как оптимальная хирургическая опция при лечении пациентов с деформирующим артрозом голеностопного сустава терминальной стадии (обзор литературы) // Кафедра травматологии и ортопедии. 2019. № 4(38). С. 18–26. doi: 10.17238/issn2226-2016.2019.4.18-26

[11] Grazhdanov KA, Zuev PP, Kauts OA, et al. Surgical rehabilitation of patients with the consequences of pilon fractures. N.N. Priorov Journal of Traumatology and Orthopedics. 2021;28(3):13–19. (In Russ). doi: 10.17816/vto65076

[12] Гражданов К.А., Зуев П.П., Кауц О.А., и др. Хирургическая реабилитация пациентов с последствиями пилона // Вестник травматологии и ортопедии им. Н.Н. Приорова. 2021. Т. 28, № 3. С. 33–39. doi: 10.17816/vto65076

[13] Kauts ОА, Barabash YuA, Kireev SI, et al. Surgical approach to the treatment of patients with sequelae of intra-articular fractures of the distal tibia (literature review). Genij Ortopedii. 2022;28(1):133–140. (In Russ). doi: 10.18019/1028-4427-2022-28-1-133-140

[14] Кауц О.А., Барабаш Ю.А., Киреев С.И., и др. Хирургическая тактика при лечении пациентов с последствиями внутрисуставных повреждений дистального отдела костей голени (обзор литературы) // Гений ортопедии. 2022. Т. 28, № 1. С. 133–140. doi: 10.18019/1028-4427-2022-28-1-133-140

[15] Mikhajlov KS, Emelyanov VG, Tikhilov RM, et al. Dynamics of changes in clinical and functional parameters in patients after arthrodesis of the ankle and subtalar joints with an intramedullary lockable nail. In: Actual problems of traumatology and orthopedics. Collection of scientific articles dedicated to the 110th anniversary of RNIITO n. a. R.R. Vreden. Saint-Petersburg; 2016. P. 196–202. (In Russ).

[16] Михайлов К.С., Емельянов В.Г., Тихилов Р.М., и др. Динамика изменений клинико-функциональных показателей у пациентов после артродезирования голеностопного и подтаранного суставов интрамедуллярным блокируемым стержнем // Актуальные проблемы травматологии и ортопедии. Сборник научных статей, посвящённый 110-летию РНИИТО им. Р.Р. Вредена. Санкт-Петербург, 2016. С. 196–202.

[17] Thevendran G, Shah K, Pinney SJ, Younger AS. Perceived risk factors for nonunion following foot and ankle arthrodesis. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2017;25(1):2309499017692703. doi: 10.1177/2309499017692703

[18] Thevendran G., Shah K., Pinney S.J., Younger A.S. Perceived risk factors for nonunion following foot and ankle arthrodesis // J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2017. Vol. 25, № 1. Р. 2309499017692703. doi: 10.1177/2309499017692703

[19] Coye TL, Tirabassi N, Foote CM, Heddy B. An umbrella systematic review and meta-analysis of systematic reviews on the topic of foot and ankle arthrodesis nonunion rates. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2022:61(6):1341–1347. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2022.04.012

[20] Coye T.L., Tirabassi N., Foote C.M., Heddy B. An umbrella systematic review and meta-analysis of systematic reviews on the topic of foot and ankle arthrodesis nonunion rates // J Foot Ankle Surg. 2022. Vol. 61, Is. 6. Р. 1341–1347. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2022.04.012

[21] Slivkov KA, Brizhan LK, Davydov DV, et al. Surgical complications after ankle-joint arthrodesis. Medical Council. 2013;(4–2):96–99. (In Russ). doi: 10.21518/2079-701X-2013-4-2-96-99

[22] Cливков К.А., Брижань Л.К., Давыдов Д.В., и др. Хирургические осложнения после артродеза голеностопного сустава // Медицинский совет. 2013. № 4–2. С. 96–99.

[23] Gorbatov RO, Pavlov DV, Motyakina OP, et al. Personalized rehabilitation of patients after ankle arthrodesis. Department of Traumatology and Orthopedics. 2016;4(20):44–47. (In Russ).

[24] Горбатов Р.О., Павлов Д.В., Мотякина О.П., и др. Персонифицированная реабилитация больных после артродеза голеностопного сустава // Кафедра травматологии и ортопедии. 2016. № 4(20). С. 44–47.

[25] Pakhomov IA, Korochkin SB, Kuznetsov VV. Tibiabalalcaneal arthrodesis in severe anchal and talocalanuenal joint injuries: a clinical case. International Journal of Applied and Fundamental Research. 2017;(12–1):79–82. (In Russ).

[26] Пахомов И.А., Корочкин С.Б., Кузнецов В.В. Большеберцово-таранно-пяточный артродез при тяжёлом поражении голеностопного и таранно-пяточного суставов: клинический случай // Международный журнал прикладных и фундаментальных исследований. 2017. № 12–1. С. 79–82.

[27] Mironov SP, editor. Orthopedics: Clinical Guidelines. Мoscow: GEOTAR-Media; 2018. P. 747–748. (In Russ).

[28] Ортопедия: клинические рекомендации / под ред. С.П. Миронова. Москва: ГЭОТАР-Медиа, 2018. С. 747–748.

[29] Raikin SM, Rampuri V. An approach to the failed ankle arthrodesis. Foot Ankle Clin. 2008;13(3):401–416, viii. doi: 10.1016/j.fcl.2008.04.009

[30] Raikin S.M., Rampuri V. An approach to the failed ankle arthrodesis // Foot Ankle Clin. 2008. Vol. 13, № 3. P. 401–416, viii. doi: 10.1016/j.fcl.2008.04.009

[31] Reeves CL, Shane AM, Sahli H, Togher C. Revision of the Malaligned Ankle Arthrodesis. Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2020;37(3):475–487. doi: 10.1016/j.cpm.2020.03.003

[32] Reeves C.L., Shane A.M., Sahli H., Togher C. Revision of the Malaligned Ankle Arthrodesis // Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2020. Vol. 37, № 3. P. 475–487. doi: 10.1016/j.cpm.2020.03.003

[33] Mills A, Fortin PT. Revision of the Failed Ankle Fusion. Instr Course Lect. 2019;(68):275–286.

[34] Mills A., Fortin P.T. Revision of the failed ankle fusion // Instr Course Lect. 2019. № 68. P. 275–286.

[35] Norkin IA, Grazhdanov KA, Barabash YuA, et al. Revision arthrodesis of the ankle and subtalar joints with use of autograft from the fibular bone. Polytrauma. 2022;(2):49–55. (In Russ). doi: 10.24412/1819-1495-2022-2-49-55

[36] Норкин И.А., Гражданов К.А., Барабаш Ю.А., и др. Ревизионное артродезирование голеностопного и подтаранного суставов аутотрансплантатом из малоберцовой кости // Политравма. 2022. № 2. С. 49–55. doi: 10.24412/1819-1495-2022-2-49-55

[37] Shapovalov VM, Khominets VV, Mikhaylov SV, et al. Reconstructive surgery of internal stable and functional osteosynthesis failures and non-infection complications. Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia. 2009;4(54):73–80. (In Russ).

[38] Шаповалов В.М., Хоминец В.В., Михайлов С.В., и др. Ревизионные операции при ошибках и неинфекционных осложнениях стабильно-функционального остеосинтеза // Травматология и ортопедия России. 2009. № 4(54). C. 73–80.

[39] McRae R, Esser M. Practical fracture treatment. Fifth edition. Edinburg: Churchill Livingstone; 2008. 447 p.

[40] McRae R., Esser M. Practical fracture treatment. Fifth edition. Edinburg: Churchill Livingstone, 2008. 447 p.

[41] Barabash AP, Barabash YuA, Zuev PP. Preclinical study of the reliability of intramedullary rods for osteosynthesis of diaphyseal fractures of the human femur. Bulletin of Dagestan State Medical Academy. 2016;1(18):42–49. (In Russ).

[42] Барабаш А.П., Барабаш Ю.А., Зуев П.П. Доклиническое исследование надёжности интрамедуллярных стержней для остеосинтеза диафизарных переломов бедренной кости человека // Вестник Дагестанской государственной медицинской академии. 2016. № 1(18). С. 42–49.

[43] Borgkhut RD, Gilfanov SI. Periimplant fractures: problems and solutions. Department of Traumatology and Orthopedics. 2016;2(18):5–8. (In Russ).

[44] Боргхут Р.Д., Гильфанов С.И. Периимплантные переломы. Проблемы и поиск решений // Кафедра травматологии и ортопедии. 2016. № 2(18). С. 5–8.

Funding

Правительство РФGovernment of the Russian Federation(НИОКТР 121032300174-6)

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Eco-Vector