2012
DOI: 10.2106/jbjs.k.00018
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Motion Versus Fixed Distraction of the Joint in the Treatment of Ankle Osteoarthritis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

2
78
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 85 publications
(80 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
2
78
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The authors divided malunions above the ankle joint in 2 main groups: following the bimalleolar fracture (Pott's type) and following the trimalleolar fracture (Cotton's type). The authors identified 3 crucial aims of supramalleolar realignment [7] b (eg, before the application of external fixator in the same surgical setting (one-stage procedure) to remove inflamed synovium, unstable cartilage, loose bodies, fibrotic tissue, osteophytes causing impingement [7] c Debridement of fibrotic tissue and impinging osteophytes in ord e r t o i m p r o v e t h e an k l e dorsiflexion [9] Procedure Indications Joint-preserving procedures Arthroscopy/arthrotomy debridement [6,7] • Ankle symptoms from specific joint conditions a • Anterior ankle impingement • Early-stage ankle osteoarthritis with intact joint space a • Posterior tibial osteophytes; posterior impingement symptoms…”
Section: Historical Perspective On Supramalleolar Osteotomymentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The authors divided malunions above the ankle joint in 2 main groups: following the bimalleolar fracture (Pott's type) and following the trimalleolar fracture (Cotton's type). The authors identified 3 crucial aims of supramalleolar realignment [7] b (eg, before the application of external fixator in the same surgical setting (one-stage procedure) to remove inflamed synovium, unstable cartilage, loose bodies, fibrotic tissue, osteophytes causing impingement [7] c Debridement of fibrotic tissue and impinging osteophytes in ord e r t o i m p r o v e t h e an k l e dorsiflexion [9] Procedure Indications Joint-preserving procedures Arthroscopy/arthrotomy debridement [6,7] • Ankle symptoms from specific joint conditions a • Anterior ankle impingement • Early-stage ankle osteoarthritis with intact joint space a • Posterior tibial osteophytes; posterior impingement symptoms…”
Section: Historical Perspective On Supramalleolar Osteotomymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…• Patients with advanced-stage ankle osteoarthritis with joint space narrowing, combined with ankle distraction procedure c Distraction arthroplasty [8,9] • Patients with mid-stage or advanced-stage ankle osteoarthritis with relatively congruent tibiotalar joint surface and well-preserved ankle joint mobility • Younger patients (younger than 50 years) with post-traumatic ankle osteoarthritis • Partial avascular necrosis of the talus Osteochondral ankle joint resurfacing [10] • Primary symptomatic osteochondral lesions generally after failed arthroscopic curettage and debridement. Corrective osteotomies [11•, 12, 13] • see the text…”
Section: Historical Perspective On Supramalleolar Osteotomymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A relatively new surgical procedure intended for joint preservation, distraction arthroplasty, does not use any graft material. This procedure employs an external fixator which crosses the ankle joint and applies a distraction force across the tibio-talar articulation [6, 12, 17]. The theory behind distraction arthroplasty is that it allows for the reparative potential of the joint by removing mechanical stress.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Distraction arthroplasty is indicated for endstage ankle OA with nearly normal alignment in young patients who would prefer to delay arthrodesis or arthroplasty (17). The patients should be compliant with treatment.…”
Section: Operative Treatmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More recently, Tellisi et al (21) reported improvement in the AOFAS scale and Medical Outcomes Study short-form 36-item questionnaire scores in a retrospective cohort of 23 patients at 30 months using the distraction arthroplasty in conjunction with adjunctive procedures. Saltzman et al (17) reported improvements in the outcome scores with both fixed and motion distraction and that motion improved the outcome scores further compared with fixed distraction; however, adding motion to the ring fixator did not improve the range of movement.…”
Section: Operative Treatmentmentioning
confidence: 99%