SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT
VOLUME 8 , ISSUE 1 ( January-March, 2021 ) > List of Articles
Silvampatti Ramaswamy Sundararajan, Rajagopalakrishnan Ramakanth, Venkatachalam Shreeram, Joseph B Joseph, Shanmuganathan Rajasekaran
Keywords : Distraction arthrodesis, In situ arthrodesis, Malunited calcaneal fracture, Subtalar arthritis
Citation Information : Sundararajan SR, Ramakanth R, Shreeram V, Joseph JB, Rajasekaran S. Is Distraction Bone Block Arthrodesis better than Subtalar Arthrodesis for Malunited Calcaneal Fractures with Subtalar Arthritis? A Retrospective Case Series. J Foot Ankle Surg Asia-Pacific 2021; 8 (1):3-7.
License: CC BY-NC 4.0
Published Online: 06-01-2021
Copyright Statement: Copyright © 2021; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.
Aim and objective: To compare the clinicoradiological outcome between in situ and distraction bone block arthrodesis in patients with malunited calcaneal fracture. Materials and methods: Patients presenting with painful subtalar joint arthritis between January 2015 and March 2018 were included after thorough clinical and radiological evaluation. In situ group I had 22 patients and distraction group II had 14. All patients were evaluated at final follow-up for functional outcome with American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot score, and radiological parameters including talocalcaneal height (TCH), calcaneal pitch (CP), lateral talocalcaneal angle (LTCA), and talar declination angle (TDA). Results: Mean follow-up was 19.26 months for in situ and 12.91 months for distraction group. AOFAS ankle-hindfoot score improved postoperative in both groups, but the difference between the groups was not significant (p value = 0.371). Statistically significant improvement was observed in radiological parameters of talocalcaneal height (p value = 0.006), calcaneal pitch (p value = 0.025), lateral talocalcaneal angle (p value = 0.078), and talar declination angle(p value = 0.02) in the distraction group. Conclusion: Distraction arthrodesis restores hindfoot radiological parameters better compared to the in situ group; however, there is no significant difference in functional outcome between the groups.
© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.