0
Scientific Articles   |    
Management of Failures of Total Ankle Replacement with the Agility Total Ankle Arthroplasty
J. Kent Ellington, MD, MS1; Sanjeev Gupta, MBBS, FRACS2; Mark S. Myerson, MD3
1 OrthoCarolina, Foot and Ankle Institute, 2001 Vail Avenue, Suite 200B, Charlotte, NC 28207. E-mail address: kentellingtonfx@gmail.com
2 RPAH Medical Centre, Suite 316, 100 Carillon Avenue, Newtown 2042, Australia. E-mail address: sanjeev.gupta@bigpond.com
3 Institute for Foot and Ankle Reconstruction, Mercy Medical Center, 301 St. Paul Place, Baltimore, MD 21202. E-mail address: mark4feet@aol.com
View Disclosures and Other Information
  • Disclosure statement for author(s): PDF

Investigation performed at the Institute for Foot and Ankle Reconstruction, Mercy Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland



Disclosure: None of the authors received payments or services, either directly or indirectly (i.e., via his or her institution), from a third party in support of any aspect of this work. One or more of the authors, or his or her institution, has had a financial relationship, in the thirty-six months prior to submission of this work, with an entity in the biomedical arena that could be perceived to influence or have the potential to influence what is written in this work. No author has had any other relationships, or has engaged in any other activities, that could be perceived to influence or have the potential to influence what is written in this work. The complete Disclosures of Potential Conflicts of Interest submitted by authors are always provided with the online version of the article.

Copyright © 2013 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2013 Dec 04;95(23):2112-2118. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.K.00920
5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case

Abstract

Background: 

Few studies have focused on treatment following failed total ankle replacement. The purpose of this study was to report the outcomes of patients undergoing revision total ankle replacement and to propose a talar component subsidence grading system that may be helpful in making decisions regarding how to revise failed total ankle replacements in the future.

Methods: 

A retrospective review was performed of fifty-three patients who underwent revision total ankle replacement and had been followed for a minimum of two years. Patients were assessed radiographically and with outcome scores. The rates of conversion to amputation or fusion were also assessed.

Results: 

The mean follow-up period was 49.1 months after the revision arthroplasty. The average time from primary total ankle replacement to revision was fifty-one months. Forty-one of the fifty-three patients (77%) were available for follow-up. The revision arthroplasty had been converted to an arthrodesis in five of the forty-one patients, and two additional patients had undergone amputation. The most common indication for revision total ankle replacement was talar subsidence (63%; twenty-six of forty-one). Twenty-two patients (54%) had a subtalar arthrodesis performed at the time of the revision arthroplasty, with nineteen of those having a custom-designed long-stem talar component placed simultaneously. The mean radiographic measurements of component position did not change significantly postoperatively. The mean postoperative scores for the thirty-four patients with a retained total ankle replacement were: 4.4 of 10 possible points on a visual analog pain scale (VAS), 65 of 100 possible points on the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) hindfoot scale, 93.5 of 100 possible points on the Short-Form 12 (SF-12), 137.9 of 204 possible points on the Revised Foot Function Index (FFI-R), and 64 of 180 possible points on the Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale (AOS). The mean arc of motion radiographically was 18° preoperatively and 23° postoperatively, with all improvement occurring in plantar flexion. A lesser amount of preoperative talar subsidence was a significant predictor of a good outcome based on the AOFAS hindfoot score (p < 0.03) and the AOS (p < 0.01) score.

Conclusions: 

Revision arthroplasty may be considered as an alternative to arthrodesis when treating patients with a failed Agility total ankle implant.

Level of Evidence: 

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Figures in this Article
    Sign In to Your Personal ProfileSign In To Access Full Content
    Not a Subscriber?
    Get online access for 30 days for $35
    New to JBJS?
    Sign up for a full subscription to both the print and online editions
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities, to comment on public articles, or to sign up for alerts.
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities
    Have a subscription to the print edition?
    Current subscribers to The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery in either the print or quarterly DVD formats receive free online access to JBJS.org.
    Forgot your password?
    Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.

     
    Forgot your username or need assistance? Please contact customer service at subs@jbjs.org. If your access is provided
    by your institution, please contact you librarian or administrator for username and password information. Institutional
    administrators, to reset your institution's master username or password, please contact subs@jbjs.org

    References

    Accreditation Statement
    These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
    CME Activities Associated with This Article
    Submit a Comment
    Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
    Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

    * = Required Field
    (if multiple authors, separate names by comma)
    Example: John Doe





    Related Content
    The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery
    JBJS Case Connector
    Topic Collections
    Related Audio and Videos
    Guidelines
    The treatment of glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis. -American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) | 9/11/2009
    Results provided by:
    PubMed
    Clinical Trials
    Readers of This Also Read...
    JBJS Jobs
    12/04/2013
    New York - Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
    12/31/2013
    S. Carolina - Department of Orthopaedic Surgery Medical Univerity of South Carlonina
    04/02/2014
    W. Virginia - Charleston Area Medical Center