Subtalar arthrodesis using a single compression screw: a comparison of results between anterograde and retrograde screwing.

IF 1.5
D Saragaglia, J C Giunta, J Gaillot, Y Tourné, B Rubens-Duval
{"title":"Subtalar arthrodesis using a single compression screw: a comparison of results between anterograde and retrograde screwing.","authors":"D Saragaglia,&nbsp;J C Giunta,&nbsp;J Gaillot,&nbsp;Y Tourné,&nbsp;B Rubens-Duval","doi":"10.1007/s00590-021-03141-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The primary objective of this study was to compare the radiological and clinical results of anterograde and retrograde screwing in subtalar arthrodesis using a single compression screw. The secondary objective was to evaluate the subjective results and consolidation of this procedure. The hypotheses were that isolated screw fixation was sufficient to achieve good consolidation and that there was no difference between the two techniques with a similar rate of bone fusion.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a monocentric, retrospective, radio-clinical study based on 99 patients (101 feet), 58 males and 41 females, with an average age of 64 years. The main aetiology was post-traumatic osteoarthritis, which represented 51% of cases. Two groups were formed: group A (52 feet) consisting of fixed arthrodesis with ascending (retrograde) screwing and group D (49 feet) consisting of fixed arthrodesis with descending (anterograde) screwing. The two groups were statistically comparable in terms of demographic data as well as aetiologies and comorbidities. Arthrodeses which were not fused at 6 months were reassessed at one year and in the event of any radio-clinical doubt regarding consolidation, an additional CT scan was prescribed. Average post-operative follow-up was 11 ± 5 years (2-27 years).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ninety-two arthrodeses (93%) were fused at one year and 9 were considered to be in non-union, 5 (9.8%) in group A, and 4 (8.3%) in group D. We recorded 30 complications, 22 of which were due to a conflict with the screw head, 18 (34.5%) in group A and 4 (8.3%) in group D (p = 0.03). Conflict between the screw head and the heel led to the removal of the screw after consolidation of the arthrodesis. The clinical results were evaluated using Odom's criteria. Nine per cent of patients described their results as excellent, 29% as good, 51% as satisfactory and 11% found the result to be poor.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The fusion rate for isolated compression screw arthrodesis is good, and there is no difference between anterograde and retrograde screws. However, the discomfort caused by the screw head being insufficiently embedded in the retrograde group led to a non-negligible number of additional surgeries to remove the screw.</p>","PeriodicalId":520619,"journal":{"name":"European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie","volume":" ","pages":"1583-1589"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-021-03141-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/10/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Introduction: The primary objective of this study was to compare the radiological and clinical results of anterograde and retrograde screwing in subtalar arthrodesis using a single compression screw. The secondary objective was to evaluate the subjective results and consolidation of this procedure. The hypotheses were that isolated screw fixation was sufficient to achieve good consolidation and that there was no difference between the two techniques with a similar rate of bone fusion.

Methods: This is a monocentric, retrospective, radio-clinical study based on 99 patients (101 feet), 58 males and 41 females, with an average age of 64 years. The main aetiology was post-traumatic osteoarthritis, which represented 51% of cases. Two groups were formed: group A (52 feet) consisting of fixed arthrodesis with ascending (retrograde) screwing and group D (49 feet) consisting of fixed arthrodesis with descending (anterograde) screwing. The two groups were statistically comparable in terms of demographic data as well as aetiologies and comorbidities. Arthrodeses which were not fused at 6 months were reassessed at one year and in the event of any radio-clinical doubt regarding consolidation, an additional CT scan was prescribed. Average post-operative follow-up was 11 ± 5 years (2-27 years).

Results: Ninety-two arthrodeses (93%) were fused at one year and 9 were considered to be in non-union, 5 (9.8%) in group A, and 4 (8.3%) in group D. We recorded 30 complications, 22 of which were due to a conflict with the screw head, 18 (34.5%) in group A and 4 (8.3%) in group D (p = 0.03). Conflict between the screw head and the heel led to the removal of the screw after consolidation of the arthrodesis. The clinical results were evaluated using Odom's criteria. Nine per cent of patients described their results as excellent, 29% as good, 51% as satisfactory and 11% found the result to be poor.

Conclusion: The fusion rate for isolated compression screw arthrodesis is good, and there is no difference between anterograde and retrograde screws. However, the discomfort caused by the screw head being insufficiently embedded in the retrograde group led to a non-negligible number of additional surgeries to remove the screw.

距下关节融合术使用单个加压螺钉:顺行和逆行螺钉的结果比较。
简介:本研究的主要目的是比较顺行螺钉和逆行螺钉在距下关节融合术中使用单个加压螺钉的放射学和临床结果。次要目的是评价该手术的主观结果和巩固情况。假设孤立的螺钉固定足以实现良好的巩固,并且两种技术在相似的骨融合率方面没有差异。方法:这是一项基于99例患者(101英尺)的单中心、回顾性、放射-临床研究,其中男性58例,女性41例,平均年龄64岁。主要病因为创伤后骨关节炎,占病例的51%。分为两组:A组(52英尺)由上行(逆行)螺钉固定关节组成,D组(49英尺)由下行(顺行)螺钉固定关节组成。两组在人口学数据、病因学和合并症方面具有统计学上的可比性。6个月未融合的关节在1年后重新评估,如果对实变有任何放射-临床怀疑,则要求进行额外的CT扫描。术后平均随访11±5年(2 ~ 27年)。结果:1年内融合92例(93%),不愈合9例,A组5例(9.8%),D组4例(8.3%)。我们记录了30例并发症,其中22例与螺钉头冲突,A组18例(34.5%),D组4例(8.3%)(p = 0.03)。螺钉头与足跟之间的冲突导致关节融合术巩固后螺钉被取出。临床结果采用奥多姆标准进行评估。9%的患者认为他们的结果很好,29%的人认为很好,51%的人认为满意,11%的人认为结果很差。结论:孤立加压螺钉融合术融合率良好,顺行与逆行螺钉无明显差异。然而,由于螺钉头未充分嵌入逆行组而引起的不适导致了不可忽略的额外手术来取出螺钉。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信