Comparative Biomechanical Analysis of Ankle Arthrodesis Techniques: Experimental Study

Abstract

Background. Despite the existing significant number of various techniques for ankle arthrodesis, a number of authors point to certain technical difficulties of these operations, the loss of the talus and tibia position during ankylosing, nonunion. The problem of the ankle arthrodesis technique improving requires new solutions.

The aim of the study was to compare the stability of various fixation systems in ankle arthrodesis by the finite element method.

Methods. The finite element method was used to evaluate the biomechanical characteristics of three variants of ankle arthrodesis systems: three cancellous screws, the originally designed plate combined with two cancellous screws, when the screw in the proximal plate’s hole is cortical, and the same plate combined with two cancellous screws, when the screw in the proximal plate’s hole with angular stability. The stresses and strains under the application of various types of loads are studied.

Results. In the anterior plate ankle fixation model combined with two cancellous screws and a proximal cortical screw, the implants and the talus experienced the least stresses compared to the other two models. Thus, the maximum equivalent stress in implants in the second variant was 68-124 MPa, in the first variant 92-147 MPa, in the third variant — 130-331 MPa. The equivalent stress in the talus in the second version of fixation ranged from 20 to 46 MPa, in the first and third versions — 28-58 MPa and 47-65 MPa, respectively. The indicators of maximum contact pressure at the border of the tibia and talus turned out to be the highest in the first variant compared to the other two models (34 MPa, 31 MPa and 31 MPa, respectively).

Conclusions. Among the studied ankle fixation systems for arthrodesis, an anterior plate combined with two cancellous screws and a proximal cortical screw is the most preferable in terms of biomechanics.

Keywords

biomechanical modeling / ankle arthrodesis / plate / cancellous screws / finite element method

References

[1] Morash J., Walton D.M., Glazebrook M. Ankle Arthrodesis Versus Total Ankle Arthroplasty. Foot Ankle Clin. 2017;22(2):251-266. doi: 10.1016/j.fcl.2017.01.013.

[2] Prissel M.A., Simpson G.A., Sutphen S.A., Hyer C.F., Berlet G.C. Ankle Arthrodesis: A Retrospective Analysis Comparing Single Column, Locked Anterior Plating to Crossed Lag Screw Technique. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2017;56(3):453-456. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2017.01.007.

[3] Suo H., Fu L., Liang H., Wang Z., Men J., Feng W. End-stage Ankle Arthritis Treated by Ankle Arthrodesis with Screw Fixation Through the Transfibular Approach: A Retrospective Analysis. Orthop Surg. 2020;12(4):1108-1119. doi: 10.1111/os.12707.

[4] DeHeer P.A., Catoire S.M., Taulman J., Borer B. Ankle arthrodesis: a literature review. Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2012;29(4):509-527. doi: 10.1016/j.cpm.2012.07.001.

[5] Somberg A.M., Whiteside W.K., Nilssen E., Murawski D., Liu W. Biomechanical evaluation of a second generation headless compression screw for ankle arthrodesis in a cadaver model. Foot Ankle Surg. 2016;22(1):50-54. doi: 10.1016/j.fas.2015.04.010.

[6] Mikhaylov K.S., Emelyanov V.G., Tikhilov R.M., Kochish A.Yu., Sorokin E.P. [Substantiation of surgery method in patient with ankle osteoarthritis: arthrodesis or arthroplasty]. Travmatologiya i ortopediya Rossii [Traumatology and orthopedics of Russia]. 2016;(1):21-32. (In Russian). doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2016-0-1-21-32.

[7] Михайлов К.С., Емельянов В.Г., Тихилов Р.М., Кочиш А.Ю., Сорокин Е.П. Обоснование выбора операций артродезирования или эндопротезирования у пациентов с артрозом голеностопного сустава. Травматология и ортопедия России. 2016;(1): 21-32. doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2016-0-1-21-32.

[8] Khominets V.V., Mikhailov S.V., Shakun D.A., Shumagaziev S.E., Komarov A.V. [Ankle Arthrodesis with Three Cancellous Screws]. Travmatologiya i ortopediya Rossii [Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia]. 2018;24(2):117-126. (In Russian). doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2018-24-2-117-126.

[9] Хоминец В.В., Михайлов С.В., Шакун Д.А., Жумагазиев С.Е., Комаров А.В. Артродезирование голеностопного сустава с использованием трех спонгиозных винтов. Травматология и ортопедия России. 2018;24(2):117-126. doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2018-24-2-117-126.

[10] Onodera T., Majima T., Kasahara Y., Takahashi D., Yamazaki S., Ando R. et al. Outcome of transfibular ankle arthrodesis with Ilizarov apparatus. Foot Ankle Int. 2012;33:964-968.

[11] Teramoto A. Nozaka K., Kamiya T., Kashiwagura T., Shoji H., Watanabe K. et al. Screw Internal Fixation and Ilizarov External Fixation: A Comparison of Outcomes in Ankle Arthrodesis. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2020;59(2):343-346. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2019.09.012.

[12] Heuvel S.B.M., Doorgakant A., Birnie M.F.N., Blundell C.M., Schepers T. Open Ankle Arthrodesis: a Systematic Review of Approaches and Fixation Methods. Foot Ankle Surg. 2021;27(3):339-347. doi: 10.1016/j.fas.2020.12.011.

[13] Steginsky B.D., Suhling M.L., Vora A.M. Ankle Arthrodesis With Anterior Plate Fixation in Patients at High Risk for Nonunion. Foot Ankle Spec. 2020;13(3):211-218. doi: 10.1177/1938640019846968.

[14] van den Heuvel S.B.M., Penning D., Schepers T. Open Ankle Arthrodesis: A Retrospective Analysis Comparing Different Fixation Methods. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2022;61(2):233-238. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2021.07.012.

[15] Ross B.J., Savage-Elliott I., Wu V.J., Rodriguez R.F. Complications Following Total Ankle Arthroplasty Versus Ankle Arthrodesis for Primary Ankle Osteoarthritis. Foot Ankle Spec. 2021:1938640020987741. doi: 10.1177/1938640020987741.

[16] Zwipp H., Rammelt S., Endres T., Heineck J. High union rates and function scores at midterm followup with ankle arthrodesis using a four screw technique. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(4):958-968. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-1074-5.

[17] Clifford C., Berg S., McCann K., Hutchinson B. A biomechanical comparison of internal fixation techniques for ankle arthrodesis. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2015;54(2):188-191. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2014.06.002.

[18] Gutteck N., Martin H., Hanke T., Matthies J.B., Heilmann A., Kielstein H. et al. Posterolateral plate fixation with Talarlock® is more stable than screw fixation in ankle arthrodesis in a biomechanical cadaver study. Foot Ankle Surg. 2018;24(3):208-212.

[19] Dubrov V.E., Zyuzin D.A., Kuzkin I.A., Shcherbakov I.M., Donchenko S.V., Saprykina K.A. [Finite element modelling of biologic system in orthopedic trauma]. Rossiiskii zhurnal biomekhaniki [Russian Journal of Biomechanics]. 2019;23(1):140-152. (In Russian). doi: 10.15593/RZhBiomeh/2019.1.12.

[20] Дубров В.Э., Зюзин Д.А., Кузькин И.А., Щербаков И.М., Донченко С.В., Сапрыкина К.А. Применение метода конечных элементов при моделировании биологических систем в травматологии и ортопедии. Российский журнал биомеханики. 2019; 23(1):140-152. doi: 10.15593/RZhBiomeh/2019.1.12.

[21] Wang S., Yu J., Ma X., Zhao D., Geng X., Huang J., Wang X. Finite element analysis of the initial stability of arthroscopic ankle arthrodesis with three-screw fixation: posteromedial versus posterolateral home-run screw. J Orthop Surg Res. 2020;15(1):252. doi: 10.1186/s13018-020-01767-7.

[22] Zhu M., Yuan C.S., Jin Z.M., Wang Y.J., Shi Y.X., Yang Z.J. et al. Initial stability and stress distribution of ankle arthroscopic arthrodesis with three kinds of 2-screw configuration fixation: a finite element analysis. J Orthop Surg Res. 2018;13(1):263. doi: 10.1186/s13018-018-0972-1.

[23] Dol A.V., Dol E.S., Ivanov D.V. [Biomechanical modelling of surgical reconstructive treatment of spinal spondylolisthesis at l4–l5 level]. Rossiiskii zhurnal biomekhaniki [Russian Journal of Biomechanics]. 2018;22(1):31-44. (In Russian). doi: 10.15593/RZhBiomeh/2018.1.03.

[24] Доль А.В., Доль Е.С., Иванов Д.В. Биомеханическое моделирование вариантов хирургического реконструктивного лечения спондилолистеза позвоночника на уровне L4-L5. Российский журнал биомеханики. 2018;22(1):31-44. doi: 10.15593/RZhBiomeh/2018.1.03.

[25] Wehner T., Claes L., Simon U. Internal loads in the human tibia during gait. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2009;24(3):299-302. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2008.12.007.

[26] López-Campos J.A., Segade A., Casarejos E., Fernández J.R., Vilán J.A., Izquierdo P. Finite Element Study of a Threaded Fastening: The Case of Surgical Screws in Bone. Symmetry. 2018;10(8):335. doi: 10.3390/sym10080335.

[27] Ivanov D.V., Dol A.V. [Biomechanical Modeling]. Saratov: Amirite, 2021. 250 p.

[28] Иванов Д.В., Доль А.В. Биомеханическое моделирование. Саратов: Амирит, 2021. 250 с.

[29] Zherebtsov S., Salishchev G., Galeyev R., Maekawa K. Mechanical Properties of Ti–6Al–4V Titanium Alloy with Submicrocrystalline Structure Produced by Severe Plastic Deformation. Materials Transactions. 2005;46(9):2020-2025. doi: 10.2320/matertrans.46.2020.

[30] Nasson S., Shuff C., Palmer D., Owen J., Wayne J., Carr J. et al. Biomechanical comparison of ankle arthrodesis techniques: crossed screws vs. blade plate. Foot Ankle Int. 2001;22(7):575-580. doi: 10.1177/107110070102200708.

[31] Friedman R.L., Glisson R.R., Nunley J.A. A biomechanical comparative analysis of two techniques for tibiotalar arthrodesis. Foot Ankle Int. 1994;15(6):301-305. doi: 10.1177/107110079401500604.

[32] Miller R.A., Firoozbakhsh K., Veitch A.J. A biomechanical evaluation of internal fixation for ankle arthrodesis comparing two methods of joint surface preparation. Orthopedics. 2000;23(5):457-460. doi: 10.3928/0147-7447-20000501-14.

[33] Erdemir A., Guess T.M., Halloran J., Tadepalli S.C., Morrison T.M. Considerations for reporting finite element analysis studies in biomechanics. J Biomech. 2012;45(4):625-633. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.11.038.

[34] Kluess D., Wieding J., Souffrant R., Mittelmeier W., Bader R. Finite element analysis in orthopaedic biomechanics. In: Moratal D., ed. Finite Element Analysis. València; 2010. p. 151-170.

[35] Vázquez A.A., Lauge-Pedersen H., Lidgren L., Taylor M. Finite element analysis of the initial stability of ankle arthrodesis with internal fixation: flat cut versus intact joint contours. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2003;18(3):244-253. doi: 10.1016/s0268-0033(02)00207-3.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

Eco-Vector