Foot & ankle international · 2021
Outcomes and Complications of Open vs Posterior Arthroscopic Subtalar Arthrodesis: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Multicenter Study.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Rungprai Chamnanni, Jaroenarpornwatana Aekachai, Chaiprom Nusorn, Phisitkul Phinit, Sripanich Yantarat
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Open subtalar arthrodesis is the standard treatment for subtalar arthritis. Posterior arthroscopic subtalar arthrodesis (PASTA) has recently gained increasing popularity due to a shorter recovery time and better cosmesis. However, studies comparing outcomes and complications between these 2 techniques are limited.
METHODS: In total, 56 patients with subtalar joint arthritis were prospectively randomized to 2 parallel groups to receive either PASTA (n = 28 patients) or open subtalar arthrodesis (n = 28 patients). The minimum follow-up period was 12 months. Primary outcome was union rate confirmed on postoperative computed tomography (CT) scan. Secondary outcomes were union time; visual analog scale (VAS), Short Form-36 (SF-36), and Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) scores; tourniquet time; and complications.
RESULTS: Union time (9.4 vs 12.8 weeks) and recovery time (time to return to activities of daily living [8.4 vs 10.8 weeks], work [10.6 vs 12.9 weeks], and sports [24.9 vs 32.7 weeks]) were significantly shorter with PASTA than with the open technique (P < .05 all). Both techniques led to significant improvements in all functional outcomes (FAAM, SF-36, and VAS scores; P < .01 all); however, there was no significant difference between the techniques in these outcomes (P > .05 all). Other outcomes, including tourniquet time (55.8 vs 67.2 min), union rate (96.3% vs 100%), and complication rate, were not significantly different between the techniques.
CONCLUSION: Both open and PASTA techniques led to significant improvements in pain and function in patients with isolated subtalar joint arthritis. Although short-term functional outcomes and complication rates were not significantly different between the techniques, the PASTA technique was better at shortening the union and recovery times.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial.
METHODS: In total, 56 patients with subtalar joint arthritis were prospectively randomized to 2 parallel groups to receive either PASTA (n = 28 patients) or open subtalar arthrodesis (n = 28 patients). The minimum follow-up period was 12 months. Primary outcome was union rate confirmed on postoperative computed tomography (CT) scan. Secondary outcomes were union time; visual analog scale (VAS), Short Form-36 (SF-36), and Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) scores; tourniquet time; and complications.
RESULTS: Union time (9.4 vs 12.8 weeks) and recovery time (time to return to activities of daily living [8.4 vs 10.8 weeks], work [10.6 vs 12.9 weeks], and sports [24.9 vs 32.7 weeks]) were significantly shorter with PASTA than with the open technique (P < .05 all). Both techniques led to significant improvements in all functional outcomes (FAAM, SF-36, and VAS scores; P < .01 all); however, there was no significant difference between the techniques in these outcomes (P > .05 all). Other outcomes, including tourniquet time (55.8 vs 67.2 min), union rate (96.3% vs 100%), and complication rate, were not significantly different between the techniques.
CONCLUSION: Both open and PASTA techniques led to significant improvements in pain and function in patients with isolated subtalar joint arthritis. Although short-term functional outcomes and complication rates were not significantly different between the techniques, the PASTA technique was better at shortening the union and recovery times.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial.