Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Background The literature on the outcome of revision total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) remains limited. We aim to report the clinical and radiological outcomes of revision TAA at a high-volume centre in the UK. Methods Retrospective review of 28 patients that underwent 29 revision TAA procedures using INBONE II prosthesis. Demographic, radiological, and patient reported outcome measures data were analysed. Results The mean (range) duration from primary TAA to revision was 87.5 (16–223) months. The main indication for the revision was aseptic loosening of the primary TAA (82.8%). Additional procedures were required in 75.9% of patients. At mean (range) follow-up of 40 (24- 60) months, the infection, re-operation, and implant survival rates were 6.9%, 6.9% and 96.5% respectively. A significant postoperative improvement in the component alignment radiographic measures was observed. Osteolysis, subsidence, loosening and heterotopic ossification rates were comparable to other reports and did not influence the clinical outcome. A significant improvement was observed in the MOXFQ (all domains) and the EQ-5D (three domains) at 24 months postoperatively. Conclusions Revision TAA using INBONE II was associated with good short-term survival and improvement in the postoperative scores at 2 years. Maintenance of the postoperatively improved alignment was documented at follow up. The relatively high survival rate in this series supports the notion that revision TAA is a satisfactory option for failed primary TAA.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Bakur A. Jamjoom
B. Siddiqui
Hatem M. Salem
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Jamjoom et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/68e664b1b6db6435875f0ef1 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1302/1358-992x.2024.11.003
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: