Periarticular joint arthritis after ankle replacement vs. ankle arthrodesis. A systematic review

Resumo

Objective: To complete a comprehensive literature review to determine the quantity and quality of literature supporting the incidence of IPJA after AA and TAR. Methods: A comprehensive review was performed to determine the quantity and quality of literature supporting the incidence of IPJA after AA and TAR. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 23 TAR and 19 AA studies were included. Results: Only one high-quality level I was found, reporting 1.2% of IPJA after TAR. Majority of the studies were level IV and reported an incidence of subtalar arthritis of 0%-40%, talonavicular 2.8%-34%, and calcaneocuboid 2.8%-3.2% after TAR and an incidence of subtalar arthritis of 7.7%-100%, talonavicular 8.69%-11.6%, and calcaneocuboid of 22% after AA. Conclusion: There is currently poor quality evidence supporting a higher rate of IPJA after AA compared to TAR. Also there is poorquality evidence that supports IPJA as a complication of TAR; however, this is the current evidence on this topic. Better-quality longterm studies are required to make definitive and accurate conclusions on the incidence of IPJA.
Level of Evidence III; Therapeutic Studies; Systematic Review.