ArticleJoint diseases and related surgery2025
Tibiotalocalcaneal arthrodesis with retrograde intramedullary nailing: What differs only approach change?
Article in Joint diseases and related surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aims to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of open (lateral transfibular) and arthroscopic joint debridement techniques in tibiotalocalcaneal arthrodesis (TTCA) using the same nail system. PATIENTS AND
methodsBetween January 2011 and December 2022, a total of 62 patients (21 males, 41 females; mean age 53.81±16.68 years; range 18 to 82 years) who underwent TTCA with retrograde intramedullary nail were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were classified as open (n=30) or arthroscopy (n=32) based on the method used for joint debridement. Data including demographic characteristics, pre-and postoperative radiographs, skin-to-skin operative times, and fluoroscopy times were recorded. Tibiotalar and subtalar union rates, coronal and sagittal ankle alignment examined through coronal tibiotalar (CTT) and sagittal tibiotalar (STT) angles were also noted. Functional outcomes were measured using the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Ankle-Hindfoot Score (AOFAS-AHS) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Complications were evaluated.
resultsA total of 34 ankles (n=30) underwent open TTCA, while 34 ankles (n=32) had arthroscopic TTCA. Baseline characteristics and follow-up duration were similar between the groups (p>0.05). The overall fusion rate (tibiotalar and subtalar) was 94.1% in the open group and 85.3% in the arthroscopic group (p=0.425). Both open and arthroscopy groups achieved satisfactory coronal and sagittal ankle alignment. The median CTT angles were 94° and 91°, and STT angles were 109° and 112°, respectively. The arthroscopy group had significantly shorter operative time, fluoroscopy time, and hospital stay (p<0.001, p=0.019, p<0.001, respectively). No significant differences were found in complication rates, postoperative AOFAS-AHS, and VAS scores (p>0.05).
conclusionBoth open and arthroscopic TTCA approaches yielded similar radiographic and clinical outcomes. Based on these findings, we can speculate that the arthroscopic technique may offer advantages in perioperative efficiency, suggesting it is a viable alternative in appropriately selected patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.