Evaluation of Hindfoot Alignment After Fixed- and Mobile-Bearing Total Ankle Prostheses

Background: End-stage ankle arthritis can involve malalignment of the ankle in both the coronal and sagittal planes. Up to 33% to 44% of patients who present for total ankle replacement (TAR) have greater than 10° of coronal plane deformity. Normalization of the sagittal and coronal alignment is key in improving survivorship and functional outcomes in TAR. In the present study, we analyzed how both the ankle and hindfoot alignment for both a fixed-bearing and mobile-bearing TAR system changed over time. Specifically, we measured coronal and sagittal alignment of both the ankle and hindfoot complex. Methods: A retrospective study was performed on 2 independent groups of patients undergoing 2 different systems for total ankle replacement: Zimmer (lateral approach, fixed-bearing) and Hintegra (anterior approach, mobile bearing). Specific demographic data and radiographic data were measured. Within-group comparisons were performed using 1-way repeated measures ANOVA, analyzing the temporal course of clinical data within the Hintegra and Zimmer groups. Results: At the ankle joint, as measured by the α and β angles (P > .05), the position of the components remained relatively similar in both the fixed- and mobile-bearing TAR at 24-month follow-up. The sagittal alignment, as measured by the TT (tibiotalar) ratio, demonstrated a posterior shifting of the talus in the mobile bearing group (P = .036). Although the fixed- and mobile-bearing TAR had both significant hindfoot alignment improvement between the preoperative radiographs and at 24 months, over time, the fixed-bearing ankle had a significant increase in both the hindfoot alignment view angle and hindfoot alignment distance (P < .001), suggesting a possible dynamism of the hindfoot in the fixed-bearing TAR. Conclusion: The lateral-approach fixed and anterior approach mobile-bearing implants maintained coronal and sagittal alignment in the short term; the temporal course of the lateral approach fixed-bearing ankle showed an increase in the valgus positioning of the hindfoot. The anterior approach mobile-bearing implant maintained its hindfoot alignment over the course of the study. Level of Evidence: Level III, case-control study.

[1]  A. Palanca,et al.  Design Rationale for Total Ankle Arthroplasty Systems: An Update. , 2018, The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.

[2]  C. Saltzman,et al.  Early Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Trabecular Metal Total Ankle Replacement Using a Transfibular Approach , 2018, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[3]  C. Gross,et al.  Tibial slope in total ankle arthroplasty: Anterior or lateral approach. , 2017, Foot and ankle surgery : official journal of the European Society of Foot and Ankle Surgeons.

[4]  W. Mcgarvey,et al.  Malalignment Correction of the Lower Limb Before, During, and After Total Ankle Arthroplasty. , 2017, Foot and ankle clinics.

[5]  Jaeyoung Kim,et al.  Change in Talar Translation in the Coronal Plane After Mobile-Bearing Total Ankle Replacement and Its Association with Lower-Limb and Hindfoot Alignment , 2017, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[6]  John S. Lewis,et al.  Secondary Arthrodesis After Total Ankle Arthroplasty , 2016, Foot & ankle international.

[7]  E. Tan,et al.  Posterior Talar Shifting in Mobile-Bearing Total Ankle Replacement , 2016, Foot & ankle international.

[8]  R. Biedermann,et al.  Effect of Coronal and Sagittal Alignment on Outcome After Mobile-Bearing Total Ankle Replacement , 2015, Foot & ankle international.

[9]  C. Saltzman,et al.  Does the Subtalar Joint Compensate for Ankle Malalignment in End-stage Ankle Arthritis? , 2015, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[10]  Keun-Bae Lee,et al.  Effect of anterior translation of the talus on outcomes of three-component total ankle arthroplasty , 2013, BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders.

[11]  B. Hintermann,et al.  HINTEGRA total ankle replacement: survivorship analysis in 684 patients. , 2013, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[12]  B. Hintermann,et al.  Total ankle replacement using HINTEGRA, an unconstrained, three-component system: surgical technique and pitfalls. , 2012, Foot and ankle clinics.

[13]  B. Hintermann,et al.  The effect of three-component total ankle replacement malalignment on clinical outcome: pain relief and functional outcome in 317 consecutive patients. , 2011, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[14]  R. Mann,et al.  Correction of Moderate to Severe Coronal Plane Deformity with the STAR™ Ankle Prosthesis , 2011, Foot & ankle international.

[15]  B. Nigg,et al.  Clinical Relevance of Hindfoot Alignment View in Total Ankle Replacement , 2010, Foot & ankle international.

[16]  B. Hintermann,et al.  Insert Position in Three-Component Total Ankle Replacement , 2010, Foot & ankle international.

[17]  B. Nigg,et al.  Does Alignment in the Hindfoot Radiograph Influence Dynamic Foot-floor Pressures in Ankle and Tibiotalocalcaneal Fusion? , 2010, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[18]  C. Saltzman,et al.  Ankle Alignment on Lateral Radiographs. Part 2: Reliability and Validity of Measures , 2006, Foot & ankle international.

[19]  S. Conti,et al.  Complications of total ankle replacement. , 2002, Foot and ankle clinics.

[20]  J. Deland,et al.  Biomechanics of the ankle joint. A perspective on total ankle replacement. , 2000, Foot and ankle clinics.

[21]  E Y Chao,et al.  The optimum position of arthrodesis of the ankle. A gait study of the knee and ankle. , 1987, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.