Mapping of Posterior Talar Dome Access Through Posteromedial Versus Posterolateral Approaches.
Journal
Journal of orthopaedic trauma
ISSN: 1531-2291
Titre abrégé: J Orthop Trauma
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8807705
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Dec 2021
01 Dec 2021
Historique:
accepted:
04
03
2021
pubmed:
17
3
2021
medline:
28
1
2022
entrez:
16
3
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To evaluate the accessible area of the talar dome through 2 standard posterior approaches [posteromedial (PM) and posterolateral (PL)] with and without distraction. A standard PM or PL approach was performed with and without external fixator distraction on 12 through-knee cadaveric legs (6 matched pairs). The accessible area of the talar dome was outlined and imaged in a microcomputed tomography scanner to achieve 3D reconstructions of the accessible surface area. The study outcomes were accessible surface area of the talar dome in (1) total surface area and (2) sagittal plane distance of the talar dome at predetermined intervals. The PM approach provided significantly more access to the talar dome than did the PL approach both with and without distraction (P < 0.001). The PM approach allowed access to 15.8% (SD = 4.7) of the talar dome without distraction and 26.4% (SD = 8.0, P < 0.001) of the talar dome with distraction. The PL approach provided access to 6.69% (SD = 2.69, P = 0.006 compared with PM) and 14.6% (SD = 6.24, P = 0.006 compared with PM) of the talar dome surface area without and with distraction. At the difficult to access posterocentral region (L50) of the talus, the PM approach without and with distraction allowed 26.7% (SD = 4.1) and 38.6% (SD = 5.6, P < 0.001) sagittal plane access compared with 18.7% (SD = 5.61, P = 0.03) and 27.5% (SD = 7.11, P = 0.003) through a PL approach. The PM approach provides greater access to the posterocentral and PM talus. Using an external fixator for distraction can improve intraoperative visualization by at least 40%. This study provides a roadmap that can help guide talar dome surgical access for treatment of posterior talus fractures and help determine when an approach that includes an osteotomy can be avoided.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33724965
doi: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000002113
pii: 00005131-202112000-00015
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e463-e469Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors report no conflict of interest.
Références
von Winning D, Lippisch R, Pliske G, et al. Surgical treatment of lateral and posterior process fractures of the talus: mid-term results of 15 cases after 7 years. Foot Ankle Surg. 2020;26:71–77.
Vallier HA. Fractures of the talus: state of the art. J Orthop Trauma. 2015;29:385–392.
Shank JR, Benirschke SK, Swords MP. Treatment of peripheral talus fractures. Foot Ankle Clin. 2017;22:181–192.
Ebraheim NA, Karkare N, Gehling DJ, et al. Use of a 30-degree external rotation view for posteromedial tubercle fractures of the talus. J Orthop Trauma. 2007;21:579–582.
Giuffrida AY, Lin SS, Abidi N, et al. Pseudo os trigonum sign: missed posteromedial talar facet fracture. Foot Ankle Int. 2003;24:642–649.
Swords M, Shank J, Benirschke S. Surgical treatment of posteromedial talus fractures: technique description and results of 10 cases. Indian J Orthop. 2018;52:269–275.
Ebraheim NA, Patil V, Owens C, et al. Clinical outcome of fractures of the talar body. Int Orthop. 2008;32:773–777.
Dale JD, Ha AS, Chew FS. Update on talar fracture patterns: a large level I trauma center study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;201:1087–1092.
Elgafy H, Ebraheim NA, Tile M, et al. Fractures of the talus: experience of two level 1 trauma centers. Foot Ankle Int. 2000;21:1023–1029.
Wijers O, Engelmann EWM, Posthuma JJ, et al. Functional outcome and quality of life after nonoperative treatment of posterior process fractures of the talus. Foot Ankle Int. 2019;40:1403–1407.
Coetzee JC, McGaver RS, Seiffert KJ, et al. Management of ankle arthritis after severe ankle trauma. J Orthop Trauma. 2020;34(suppl 1):S26–s31.
Stephens AR, Grujic L. Post-traumatic hindfoot arthritis. J Orthop Trauma. 2020;34(suppl 1):S32–s37.
Muir D, Saltzman CL, Tochigi Y, et al. Talar dome access for osteochondral lesions. Am J Sports Med. 2006;34:1457–1463.
Kubiak EN, Nickisch F. Posteromedial approach for talar body fractures: avoiding the medial malleolar osteotomy. Tech Foot Ankle Surg. 2009;8:65–69.
Hsu AR, Scolaro JA. Posteromedial approach for open reduction and internal fixation of talar process fractures. Foot Ankle Int. 2016;37:446–452.
Ziran BH, Abidi NA, Scheel MJ. Medial malleolar osteotomy for exposure of complex talar body fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 2001;15:513–518.
Bull PE, Berlet GC, Canini C, et al. Rate of malunion following Bi-plane chevron medial malleolar osteotomy. Foot Ankle Int. 2016;37:620–626.
Leumann A, Horisberger M, Buettner O, et al. Medial malleolar osteotomy for the treatment of talar osteochondral lesions: anatomical and morbidity considerations. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016;24:2133–2139.
Patzkowski JC, Kirk KL, Orr JD, et al. Quantification of posterior ankle exposure through an achilles tendon-splitting versus posterolateral approach. Foot Ankle Int. 2012;33:900–904.
Malagelada F, Dalmau-Pastor M, Vega J, et al. Access to the talar dome surface with different surgical approaches. Foot Ankle Surg. 2019;25:618–622.
Rausch S, Loracher C, Frober R, et al. Anatomical evaluation of different approaches for tibiotalocalcaneal arthrodesis. Foot Ankle Int. 2014;35:163–167.
Forberger J, Sabandal PV, Dietrich M, et al. Posterolateral approach to the displaced posterior malleolus: functional outcome and local morbidity. Foot Ankle Int. 2009;30:309–314.
Talbot M, Steenblock TR, Cole PA. Posterolateral approach for open reduction and internal fixation of trimalleolar ankle fractures. Can J Surg. 2005;48:487–490.
Dowdy PA, Watson BV, Amendola A, et al. Noninvasive ankle distraction: relationship between force, magnitude of distraction, and nerve conduction abnormalities. Arthroscopy. 1996;12:64–69.
Elias I, Zoga AC, Morrison WB, et al. Osteochondral lesions of the talus: localization and morphologic data from 424 patients using a novel anatomical grid scheme. Foot Ankle Int. 2007;28:154–161.
Young KW, Deland JT, Lee KT, et al. Medial approaches to osteochondral lesion of the talus without medial malleolar osteotomy. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2010;18:634–637.
Assal M, Dalmau-Pastor M, Ray A, et al. How to get to the distal posterior tibial malleolus? A cadaveric anatomic study defining the access corridors through 3 different approaches. J Orthop Trauma. 2017;31:e127–e129.
Lee C, Brodke D, Perdue PW Jr, et al. Talus fractures: evaluation and treatment. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2020;28:e878–e887.
Sripanich Y, Dekeyser G, Steadman J, et al. Limitations of accessibility of the talar dome with different open surgical approaches. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2020;29:1304–1317.
Hirtler L, Schellander K, Schuh R. Accessibility to talar dome in neutral position, dorsiflexion, or noninvasive distraction in posterior ankle arthroscopy. Foot Ankle Int. 2019;40:978–986.
Dayton P, Feilmeier M, Parker K, et al. Experimental comparison of the clinical measurement of ankle joint dorsiflexion and radiographic tibiotalar position. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2017;56:1036–1040.
Phisitkul P, Akoh CC, Rungprai C, et al. Optimizing arthroscopy for osteochondral lesions of the talus: the effect of ankle positions and distraction during anterior and posterior arthroscopy in a cadaveric model. Arthroscopy. 2017;33:2238–2245.