Charcot Midfoot Reconstruction: Does Subtalar Arthrodesis or Medial Column Fixation Improve Outcomes?

Charcot neuroarthropathy is a complication of neuropathy often secondary to diabetes mellitus and most commonly affects the midfoot. In these patients, reconstruction of the foot may be required for limb salvage. A superconstruct technique has previously been described using intramedullary beaming f...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of foot and ankle surgery 2020-11, Vol.59 (6), p.1219-1223
Hauptverfasser: Manchanda, Kshitij, Wallace, S. Blake, Ahn, Junho, Nakonezny, Paul, Liu, George T., Raspovic, Katherine M., VanPelt, Michael, Wukich, Dane K., Lalli, Trapper
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1223
container_issue 6
container_start_page 1219
container_title The Journal of foot and ankle surgery
container_volume 59
creator Manchanda, Kshitij
Wallace, S. Blake
Ahn, Junho
Nakonezny, Paul
Liu, George T.
Raspovic, Katherine M.
VanPelt, Michael
Wukich, Dane K.
Lalli, Trapper
description Charcot neuroarthropathy is a complication of neuropathy often secondary to diabetes mellitus and most commonly affects the midfoot. In these patients, reconstruction of the foot may be required for limb salvage. A superconstruct technique has previously been described using intramedullary beaming fixation of the midfoot and hindfoot to span the zone of injury. Inclusion of the subtalar joint in the arthrodesis construct is not consistently performed among different surgeons. The aim of this study was to describe midfoot beaming constructs and postoperative complications after midfoot reconstruction with and without subtalar arthrodesis. We reviewed medical records of patients who underwent midfoot Charcot reconstruction with an intramedullary beaming superconstruct. Patients included in the study had at least 3 months of follow-up and had Sanders-Frykberg II/III classification of Charcot neuroarthropathy. Postoperative radiographs were evaluated for evidence of hardware failure at the latest follow-up evaluation. The main variables of interest were: hardware failure or nonunion requiring revision operation, deep infection, and unplanned reoperation. Thirty patients who underwent midfoot reconstruction were included. The mean follow-up was 67.4 ± 25.9 weeks. Twenty-two (73.3%) patients had concomitant subtalar arthrodesis and midfoot beaming. Overall complications were lower in patients with subtalar arthrodesis (40.9%) than those without subtalar arthrodesis (75%) resulting in an odds ratio of 0.271 (0.042-1.338, p = .146). Furthermore, increased number of screws used in the midfoot construct was negatively correlated with complications (r = −0.44, p = .01). An intramedullary midfoot beaming superconstruct with subtalar arthrodesis has previously been proposed to provide better fixation after midfoot beaming Charcot neuroarthropathy reconstruction. Our results suggest including the subtalar joint as part of a superconstruct for the reconstruction of Sanders-Frykberg II/III Charcot results in an 80% lower complication rate than intramedullary beaming alone. We also found an increased number of screws used in the midfoot results in a lower complication rate.
doi_str_mv 10.1053/j.jfas.2020.07.001
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2444609249</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1067251620302556</els_id><sourcerecordid>2444609249</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c333t-4bc79cf80d6c473e8e24077c3069bc95c721121f873660fec89de2841f3f33323</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1P3DAQhqOqlUopf6AnH7kkjD8SJwgJoQUKEgipH2fLOxkLr5KY2g4q_75ebc-c3jnM847mqapvHBoOrTzbNTtnUyNAQAO6AeAfqiPeKlELIdTHMkOna9Hy7nP1JaUdgBBD3x5VtHm2EUNmj350oeQPwrCkHFfMPizn7DpQYj_XbbaTjewq5ucYRko-sRDZI43eTmwTpnVe2K3_a_cQu59fYngl9rRmDDOly6_VJ2enRCf_87j6fXvza3NXPzx9v99cPdQopcy12qIe0PUwdqi0pJ6EAq1RQjdscWhRC84Fd72WXQeOsB9GEr3iTrpSIORxdXroLff_rJSymX1Cmia7UFiTEUqpDgahhrIqDqsYQ0qRnHmJfrbxzXAwe6dmZ_ZOzd6pAW2K0wJdHCAqT7x6iiahpwWLhkiYzRj8e_g_qa-AGw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2444609249</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Charcot Midfoot Reconstruction: Does Subtalar Arthrodesis or Medial Column Fixation Improve Outcomes?</title><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Manchanda, Kshitij ; Wallace, S. Blake ; Ahn, Junho ; Nakonezny, Paul ; Liu, George T. ; Raspovic, Katherine M. ; VanPelt, Michael ; Wukich, Dane K. ; Lalli, Trapper</creator><creatorcontrib>Manchanda, Kshitij ; Wallace, S. Blake ; Ahn, Junho ; Nakonezny, Paul ; Liu, George T. ; Raspovic, Katherine M. ; VanPelt, Michael ; Wukich, Dane K. ; Lalli, Trapper</creatorcontrib><description>Charcot neuroarthropathy is a complication of neuropathy often secondary to diabetes mellitus and most commonly affects the midfoot. In these patients, reconstruction of the foot may be required for limb salvage. A superconstruct technique has previously been described using intramedullary beaming fixation of the midfoot and hindfoot to span the zone of injury. Inclusion of the subtalar joint in the arthrodesis construct is not consistently performed among different surgeons. The aim of this study was to describe midfoot beaming constructs and postoperative complications after midfoot reconstruction with and without subtalar arthrodesis. We reviewed medical records of patients who underwent midfoot Charcot reconstruction with an intramedullary beaming superconstruct. Patients included in the study had at least 3 months of follow-up and had Sanders-Frykberg II/III classification of Charcot neuroarthropathy. Postoperative radiographs were evaluated for evidence of hardware failure at the latest follow-up evaluation. The main variables of interest were: hardware failure or nonunion requiring revision operation, deep infection, and unplanned reoperation. Thirty patients who underwent midfoot reconstruction were included. The mean follow-up was 67.4 ± 25.9 weeks. Twenty-two (73.3%) patients had concomitant subtalar arthrodesis and midfoot beaming. Overall complications were lower in patients with subtalar arthrodesis (40.9%) than those without subtalar arthrodesis (75%) resulting in an odds ratio of 0.271 (0.042-1.338, p = .146). Furthermore, increased number of screws used in the midfoot construct was negatively correlated with complications (r = −0.44, p = .01). An intramedullary midfoot beaming superconstruct with subtalar arthrodesis has previously been proposed to provide better fixation after midfoot beaming Charcot neuroarthropathy reconstruction. Our results suggest including the subtalar joint as part of a superconstruct for the reconstruction of Sanders-Frykberg II/III Charcot results in an 80% lower complication rate than intramedullary beaming alone. We also found an increased number of screws used in the midfoot results in a lower complication rate.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1067-2516</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1542-2224</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1053/j.jfas.2020.07.001</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Charcot neuroarthropathy ; diabetes mellitus ; intramedullary beaming ; midfoot ; subtalar joint ; superconstruct</subject><ispartof>The Journal of foot and ankle surgery, 2020-11, Vol.59 (6), p.1219-1223</ispartof><rights>2020 the American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c333t-4bc79cf80d6c473e8e24077c3069bc95c721121f873660fec89de2841f3f33323</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c333t-4bc79cf80d6c473e8e24077c3069bc95c721121f873660fec89de2841f3f33323</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.jfas.2020.07.001$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Manchanda, Kshitij</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wallace, S. Blake</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahn, Junho</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nakonezny, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, George T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Raspovic, Katherine M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VanPelt, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wukich, Dane K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lalli, Trapper</creatorcontrib><title>Charcot Midfoot Reconstruction: Does Subtalar Arthrodesis or Medial Column Fixation Improve Outcomes?</title><title>The Journal of foot and ankle surgery</title><description>Charcot neuroarthropathy is a complication of neuropathy often secondary to diabetes mellitus and most commonly affects the midfoot. In these patients, reconstruction of the foot may be required for limb salvage. A superconstruct technique has previously been described using intramedullary beaming fixation of the midfoot and hindfoot to span the zone of injury. Inclusion of the subtalar joint in the arthrodesis construct is not consistently performed among different surgeons. The aim of this study was to describe midfoot beaming constructs and postoperative complications after midfoot reconstruction with and without subtalar arthrodesis. We reviewed medical records of patients who underwent midfoot Charcot reconstruction with an intramedullary beaming superconstruct. Patients included in the study had at least 3 months of follow-up and had Sanders-Frykberg II/III classification of Charcot neuroarthropathy. Postoperative radiographs were evaluated for evidence of hardware failure at the latest follow-up evaluation. The main variables of interest were: hardware failure or nonunion requiring revision operation, deep infection, and unplanned reoperation. Thirty patients who underwent midfoot reconstruction were included. The mean follow-up was 67.4 ± 25.9 weeks. Twenty-two (73.3%) patients had concomitant subtalar arthrodesis and midfoot beaming. Overall complications were lower in patients with subtalar arthrodesis (40.9%) than those without subtalar arthrodesis (75%) resulting in an odds ratio of 0.271 (0.042-1.338, p = .146). Furthermore, increased number of screws used in the midfoot construct was negatively correlated with complications (r = −0.44, p = .01). An intramedullary midfoot beaming superconstruct with subtalar arthrodesis has previously been proposed to provide better fixation after midfoot beaming Charcot neuroarthropathy reconstruction. Our results suggest including the subtalar joint as part of a superconstruct for the reconstruction of Sanders-Frykberg II/III Charcot results in an 80% lower complication rate than intramedullary beaming alone. We also found an increased number of screws used in the midfoot results in a lower complication rate.</description><subject>Charcot neuroarthropathy</subject><subject>diabetes mellitus</subject><subject>intramedullary beaming</subject><subject>midfoot</subject><subject>subtalar joint</subject><subject>superconstruct</subject><issn>1067-2516</issn><issn>1542-2224</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE1P3DAQhqOqlUopf6AnH7kkjD8SJwgJoQUKEgipH2fLOxkLr5KY2g4q_75ebc-c3jnM847mqapvHBoOrTzbNTtnUyNAQAO6AeAfqiPeKlELIdTHMkOna9Hy7nP1JaUdgBBD3x5VtHm2EUNmj350oeQPwrCkHFfMPizn7DpQYj_XbbaTjewq5ucYRko-sRDZI43eTmwTpnVe2K3_a_cQu59fYngl9rRmDDOly6_VJ2enRCf_87j6fXvza3NXPzx9v99cPdQopcy12qIe0PUwdqi0pJ6EAq1RQjdscWhRC84Fd72WXQeOsB9GEr3iTrpSIORxdXroLff_rJSymX1Cmia7UFiTEUqpDgahhrIqDqsYQ0qRnHmJfrbxzXAwe6dmZ_ZOzd6pAW2K0wJdHCAqT7x6iiahpwWLhkiYzRj8e_g_qa-AGw</recordid><startdate>202011</startdate><enddate>202011</enddate><creator>Manchanda, Kshitij</creator><creator>Wallace, S. Blake</creator><creator>Ahn, Junho</creator><creator>Nakonezny, Paul</creator><creator>Liu, George T.</creator><creator>Raspovic, Katherine M.</creator><creator>VanPelt, Michael</creator><creator>Wukich, Dane K.</creator><creator>Lalli, Trapper</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202011</creationdate><title>Charcot Midfoot Reconstruction: Does Subtalar Arthrodesis or Medial Column Fixation Improve Outcomes?</title><author>Manchanda, Kshitij ; Wallace, S. Blake ; Ahn, Junho ; Nakonezny, Paul ; Liu, George T. ; Raspovic, Katherine M. ; VanPelt, Michael ; Wukich, Dane K. ; Lalli, Trapper</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c333t-4bc79cf80d6c473e8e24077c3069bc95c721121f873660fec89de2841f3f33323</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Charcot neuroarthropathy</topic><topic>diabetes mellitus</topic><topic>intramedullary beaming</topic><topic>midfoot</topic><topic>subtalar joint</topic><topic>superconstruct</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Manchanda, Kshitij</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wallace, S. Blake</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ahn, Junho</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nakonezny, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Liu, George T.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Raspovic, Katherine M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VanPelt, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wukich, Dane K.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lalli, Trapper</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Journal of foot and ankle surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Manchanda, Kshitij</au><au>Wallace, S. Blake</au><au>Ahn, Junho</au><au>Nakonezny, Paul</au><au>Liu, George T.</au><au>Raspovic, Katherine M.</au><au>VanPelt, Michael</au><au>Wukich, Dane K.</au><au>Lalli, Trapper</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Charcot Midfoot Reconstruction: Does Subtalar Arthrodesis or Medial Column Fixation Improve Outcomes?</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of foot and ankle surgery</jtitle><date>2020-11</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>59</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1219</spage><epage>1223</epage><pages>1219-1223</pages><issn>1067-2516</issn><eissn>1542-2224</eissn><abstract>Charcot neuroarthropathy is a complication of neuropathy often secondary to diabetes mellitus and most commonly affects the midfoot. In these patients, reconstruction of the foot may be required for limb salvage. A superconstruct technique has previously been described using intramedullary beaming fixation of the midfoot and hindfoot to span the zone of injury. Inclusion of the subtalar joint in the arthrodesis construct is not consistently performed among different surgeons. The aim of this study was to describe midfoot beaming constructs and postoperative complications after midfoot reconstruction with and without subtalar arthrodesis. We reviewed medical records of patients who underwent midfoot Charcot reconstruction with an intramedullary beaming superconstruct. Patients included in the study had at least 3 months of follow-up and had Sanders-Frykberg II/III classification of Charcot neuroarthropathy. Postoperative radiographs were evaluated for evidence of hardware failure at the latest follow-up evaluation. The main variables of interest were: hardware failure or nonunion requiring revision operation, deep infection, and unplanned reoperation. Thirty patients who underwent midfoot reconstruction were included. The mean follow-up was 67.4 ± 25.9 weeks. Twenty-two (73.3%) patients had concomitant subtalar arthrodesis and midfoot beaming. Overall complications were lower in patients with subtalar arthrodesis (40.9%) than those without subtalar arthrodesis (75%) resulting in an odds ratio of 0.271 (0.042-1.338, p = .146). Furthermore, increased number of screws used in the midfoot construct was negatively correlated with complications (r = −0.44, p = .01). An intramedullary midfoot beaming superconstruct with subtalar arthrodesis has previously been proposed to provide better fixation after midfoot beaming Charcot neuroarthropathy reconstruction. Our results suggest including the subtalar joint as part of a superconstruct for the reconstruction of Sanders-Frykberg II/III Charcot results in an 80% lower complication rate than intramedullary beaming alone. We also found an increased number of screws used in the midfoot results in a lower complication rate.</abstract><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><doi>10.1053/j.jfas.2020.07.001</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1067-2516
ispartof The Journal of foot and ankle surgery, 2020-11, Vol.59 (6), p.1219-1223
issn 1067-2516
1542-2224
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2444609249
source Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects Charcot neuroarthropathy
diabetes mellitus
intramedullary beaming
midfoot
subtalar joint
superconstruct
title Charcot Midfoot Reconstruction: Does Subtalar Arthrodesis or Medial Column Fixation Improve Outcomes?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T01%3A41%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Charcot%20Midfoot%20Reconstruction:%20Does%20Subtalar%20Arthrodesis%20or%20Medial%20Column%20Fixation%20Improve%20Outcomes?&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20foot%20and%20ankle%20surgery&rft.au=Manchanda,%20Kshitij&rft.date=2020-11&rft.volume=59&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1219&rft.epage=1223&rft.pages=1219-1223&rft.issn=1067-2516&rft.eissn=1542-2224&rft_id=info:doi/10.1053/j.jfas.2020.07.001&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2444609249%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2444609249&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S1067251620302556&rfr_iscdi=true