Outcomes of Hindfoot and Ankle Arthrodesis in Patients with Charcot Neuroarthropathy

Vladimir A. Vinogradov , Stanislav A. Osnach , Victor G. Protsko , Vladimir N. Obolenskiy , Sargon K. Tamoev , Vasiliy V. Kuznetsov , Nikolay V. Zagorodniy , Levon G. Makinyan

Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia ›› 2025, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (2) : 67 -76.

PDF (553KB)
Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia ›› 2025, Vol. 31 ›› Issue (2) : 67 -76. DOI: 10.17816/2311-2905-17658
Clinical studies
research-article

Outcomes of Hindfoot and Ankle Arthrodesis in Patients with Charcot Neuroarthropathy

Author information +
History +
PDF (553KB)

Abstract

Background. Involvement of the hindfoot and ankle in diabetic Charcot neuroarthropathy is often associated with subtotal or total defects of the talus, leading to unstable multiplanar deformities and a significant loss of weight-bearing capacity in the affected limb. Numerous arthrodesis techniques and fixation methods have been developed; however, in most cases, the final choice of surgical treatment depends on the surgeon’s preference.

The aim of the study — to evaluate the outcomes of the surgical treatment of patients with hindfoot and ankle deformities due to Charcot neuroarthropathy who underwent arthrodesis using various fixation methods.

Methods. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 96 patients (97 feet) with Charcot neuroarthropathy affecting the hindfoot. Of these, 28 patients had type 1 diabetes, and 53 had type 2 diabetes. The average follow-up period was 21.0±1.0 months. Arthrodesis with the Ilizarov external fixator was performed in 86 (88.7%) cases, and internal fixation using screws, plates, or intramedullary nails was used in 11 (11.3%) cases.

Results. Bony ankylosis and fusion were achieved in 95 (98.0%) cases, including 85 (98.8%) out of 86 cases with external fixation and 10 (90.9%) out of 11 cases with internal fixation. Due to noncompliance with weight-bearing protocols, revision arthrodesis was required in 9 (9.3%) cases at different stages of treatment and rehabilitation. Septic complications occurred in 20 (20.6%) cases at various treatment stages.

Conclusions. High rates of bony ankylosis formation were achieved with both external and internal fixation methods. However, external fixation proved to be a more reliable treatment option for patients with Charcot neuroarthropathy, given the typical characteristics of this cohort of patients, including poor skin condition, high BMI, reduced compliance, and challenges in adhering to fixation and weight-bearing regimens.

Keywords

Charcot neuroarthropathy / hindfoot arthrodesis / ankle arthrodesis / bone defect reconstruction / bone grafting

Cite this article

Download citation ▾
Vladimir A. Vinogradov, Stanislav A. Osnach, Victor G. Protsko, Vladimir N. Obolenskiy, Sargon K. Tamoev, Vasiliy V. Kuznetsov, Nikolay V. Zagorodniy, Levon G. Makinyan. Outcomes of Hindfoot and Ankle Arthrodesis in Patients with Charcot Neuroarthropathy. Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia, 2025, 31(2): 67-76 DOI:10.17816/2311-2905-17658

登录浏览全文

4963

注册一个新账户 忘记密码

References

[1]

Rogers L.C., Frykberg R.G., Armstrong D.G., Boulton A.J., Edmonds M., Van G.H. et al. The Charcot foot in diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2011;34(9):2123-2129. doi: 10.2337/dc11-0844.

[2]

Dayton P., Feilmeier M., Thompson M., Whitehouse P., Reimer R.A. Comparison of Complications for Internal and External Fixation for Charcot Reconstruction: A Systematic Review. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2015;54(6): 1072-1075. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2015.06.003.

[3]

Sanders L.J., Frykberg R.G. The Charcot foot. In: Bowker J.H., Pfeifer M.A. (eds.) Levin and O’Neal’s The Diabetic Foot. 7th ed. Mosby; 2008. p. 257-283.

[4]

Pinzur M.S. Treatment of Ankle and Hindfoot Charcot Arthropathy. Foot Ankle Clin. 2020;25(2):293-303. doi: 10.1016/j.fcl.2020.02.010.

[5]

Schaper N.C., van Netten J.J., Apelqvist J., Bus S.A., Fitridge R., Game F. et al. IWGDF Guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetes-related foot disease. 2023. Available from: https://iwgdfguidelines.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/IWGDF-Guidelines-2023.pdf.

[6]

Burns P.R., Dunse A. Tibiotalocalcaneal Arthrodesis for Foot and Ankle Deformities. Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2017;34(3):357-380. doi: 10.1016/j.cpm.2017.02.007.

[7]

Ettinger S., Stukenborg-Colsman C., Plaass C., Yao D., Claassen L., Berger S. et al. Tibiocalcaneal arthrodesis as a limb salvage procedure for complex hindfoot deformities. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2016;136(4): 457-462. doi: 10.1007/s00402-016-2420-1.

[8]

LaPorta G.A., Begum M., Guzelak S., D’Andelet A. The Use of Hexapod External Fixation in the Management of Charcot Foot and Ankle Deformities. Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2022;39(4):629-642. doi: 10.1016/j.cpm.2022.05.010.

[9]

Hutchinson B. Circular Fixation in Charcot. Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2022;39(4):643-658. doi: 10.1016/j.cpm.2022.05.008.

[10]

Richman J., Cota A., Weinfeld S. Intramedullary Nailing and External Ring Fixation for Tibiotalocalcaneal Arthrodesis in Charcot Arthropathy. Foot Ankle Int. 2017;38(2):149-152. doi: 10.1177/1071100716671884.

[11]

Fabrin J., Larsen K., Holstein P.E. Arthrodesis with external fixation in the unstable or misaligned Charcot ankle in patients with diabetes mellitus. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2007;6(2):102-107. doi: 10.1177/1534734607302379.

[12]

Wukich D.K., Belczyk R.J., Burns P.R., Frykberg R.G. Complications encountered with circular ring fixation in persons with diabetes mellitus. Foot Ankle Int. 2008;29(10):994-1000. doi: 10.3113/FAI.2008.0994.

[13]

Bajuri M.Y., Manas A.M., Zamri K.S. Functional outcomes of tibiotalocalcaneal arthrodesis using a hindfoot arthrodesis nail in treating Charcot’s arthropathy deformity. Front Surg. 2023;9:862133. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.862133.

[14]

Franceschi F., Franceschetti E., Torre G., Papalia R., Samuelsson K., Karlsson J. et al. Tibiotalocalcaneal arthrodesis using an intramedullary nail: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016;24(4):1316-1325. doi: 10.1007/s00167-015-3548-1.

[15]

von Recum J. Tibiotalocalcaneal corrective arthrodesis in Charcot arthropathy of the ankle with a retrograde nail. Oper Orthop Traumatol. 2015;27(2):114-128. (In German). doi: 10.1007/s00064-014-0336-x.

[16]

Rana B., Patel S. Results of Ankle and Hind foot arthrodesis in Diabetic Charcot Neuroarthropathy — A retrospective analysis of 44 patients. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2021;23:101637. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2021.101637.

[17]

Cianni L., Bocchi M.B., Vitiello R., Greco T., De Marco D., Masci G. et al. Arthrodesis in the Charcot foot: a systematic review. Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2020;12(Suppl 1):8670. doi: 10.4081/or.2020.8670.

[18]

Sanders L., Frykberg R. Diabetic neuropathic osteoarthropathy: The Сharcot foot. In: Frykberg R.G. (eds.) The high risk foot in diabetes mellitus. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingston; 1991. p. 325-333.

[19]

Wagner F.W. Jr. The dysvascular foot: a system for diagnosis and treatment. Foot Ankle. 1981;2(2):64-122. doi: 10.1177/107110078100200202.

[20]

Hicks C.W., Canner J.K., Karagozlu H., Mathioudakis N., Sherman R.L., Black J.H. 3rd et al. The Society for Vascular Surgery Wound, Ischemia, and foot Infection (WIfI) classification system correlates with cost of care for diabetic foot ulcers treated in a multidisciplinary setting. J Vasc Surg. 2018;67(5): 1455-1462. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2017.08.090.

[21]

Eichenholtz S.N. Charcot joints. Springfield: Charles C. Thomas; 1966.

[22]

Chantelau E.A., Grützner G. Is the Eichenholtz classification still valid for the diabetic Charcot foot? Swiss Med Wkly. 2014;144:w13948. doi: 10.4414/smw.2014.13948.

[23]

Hartig N., Krenn S., Trnka H.J. Surgical treatment of the Charcot foot: long-term results and systematic review. Orthopade. 2015;44(1):14-24. (In German). doi: 10.1007/s00132-014-3058-8.

[24]

Бенсман В.М., Савченко Ю.П., Гуменюк С.Е., Триандафилов К.Г., Васильченко П.П., Пятаков С.Н. и др. Хирургическое лечение диабетической нейроостеоартропатии и его отдаленные результаты. Хирургия. Журнал им. Н.И. Пирогова. 2017;(6):41-50. doi: 10.17116/hirurgia2017641-50. Bensman V.M., Savchenko Yu.P., Gumenyuk S.E., Triandafilov K.G., Vasil’chenko P.P., Pyatakov S.N. et al. Surgical treatment of diabetic neuroosteoarthropathy (DNOAP) and its long-term results. Pirogov Russian Journal of Surgery. 2017;(6):41-50. (In Russian). doi: 10.17116/hirurgia2017641-50.

[25]

Stapleton J.J., Zgonis T. Surgical reconstruction of the diabetic Charcot foot: internal, external or combined fixation? Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2012;29(3):425-433. doi: 10.1016/j.cpm.2012.04.003.

[26]

Wukich D.K., Liu G.T., Johnson M.J., Van Pelt M.D., Raspovic K.M., Lalli T. et al. A Systematic Review of Intramedullary Fixation in Midfoot Charcot Neuroarthropathy. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2022;61(6):1334-1340. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2022.04.009.

[27]

Bajuri M.Y., Ong S.L., Das S., Mohamed I.N. Charcot Neuroarthropathy: Current Surgical Management and Update. A Systematic Review. Front Surg. 2022;9:820826. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.820826.

[28]

ElAlfy B., Ali A.M., Fawzy S.I. Ilizarov External Fixator Versus Retrograde Intramedullary Nailing for Ankle Joint Arthrodesis in Diabetic Charcot Neuroarthropathy. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2017;56(2):309-313. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2016.10.014.

[29]

El-Mowafi H., Abulsaad M., Kandil Y., El-Hawary A., Ali S. Hybrid Fixation for Ankle Fusion in Diabetic Charcot Arthropathy. Foot Ankle Int. 2018;39(1):93-98. doi: 10.1177/1071100717735074.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Eco-Vector

AI Summary AI Mindmap
PDF (553KB)

327

Accesses

0

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

AI思维导图

/