During reconstructive procedures of the hindfoot, a structural graft is often needed to fill gaps. To eliminate donor site morbidity and limited availability of autografts, porous tantalum was used.
Methods:
Eighteen patients who underwent subtalar joint distraction arthrodesis by means of trabecular metal augment were reviewed retrospectively. The results were evaluated clinically, with the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) score and the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and were assessed radiologically. The mean follow-up period was 18 months.
Results:
Computed tomography showed sound fusion. There was a marked increase in AOFAS scores and a decrease in VAS scores. Arthrodesis was achieved in all cases with no major postoperative complications. Radiographically, there was a marked increase in all measured parameters (talocalcaneal angle, talocalcaneal height, talar declination angle), and the intraoperatively achieved correction was maintained at the last follow-up visit.
Conclusion:
Our data suggest that porous tantalum may be used as a structural graft option for subtalar arthrodesis.
AronsonJNunleyJFrankovitchK. Lateral talocalcaneal angle in assessment of subtalar valgus: follow-up of seventy Grice-Green arthrodeses. Foot Ankle. 1983;4(2):56-63.
2.
BobynJDStackpoolGJHackingSATanzerMKrygierJJ. Characteristics of bone ingrowth and interface mechanics of a new porous tantalum biomaterial. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1999;81(5):907-914.
3.
BobynJDTohKKHackingSATanzerMKrygierJJ. Tissue response to porous tantalum acetabular cups: a canine model. J Arthroplasty. 1999;14(3):347-354.
4.
BouchardMBarkerLGClaridgeRJ. Technique tip: tantalum: a structural bone graft option for foot and ankle surgery. Foot Ankle Int. 2004;25(1):39-42.
5.
BuchBDMyersonMSMillerSD. Primary subtalar arthrodesis for the treatment of comminuted calcaneal fractures. Foot Ankle Int. 1996;17(2):61-70.
6.
CarrJBHansenSTBenirschkeSK. Subtalar distraction bone block fusion for late complications of os calcis fractures. Foot Ankle. 1988;9(2):81-86.
7.
ChanSCAlexanderIJ. Subtalar arthrodesis with interposition tricortical iliac crest graft for late pain and deformity after calcaneus fracture. Foot Ankle Int. 1997;18(10):613-615.
8.
ChandlerJTBonarSKAndersonRBDavisWH. Results of in situ subtalar arthrodesis for late sequelae of calcaneus fractures. Foot Ankle Int. 1999;20(1):18-24.
9.
D’AngeloFMurenaLCampagnoloMZattiGCherubinoP. Analysis of bone ingrowth on a tantalum cup. Indian J Orthop. 2008;42(3):275-278.
10.
DahmDLKitaokaHB. Subtalar arthrodesis with internal compression for post-traumatic arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80(1):134-138.
11.
DieziCFavrePVienneP. Primary isolated subtalar arthrodesis: outcome after 2 to 5 years follow-up. Foot Ankle Int. 2008;29(12):1195-1202.
12.
EasleyMETrnkaHJSchonLCMyersonMS. Isolated subtalar arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000;82(5):613-624.
13.
FitzgibbonsTCHawksMAMcMullenSTIndaDJ. Bone grafting in surgery about the foot and ankle: indications and techniques. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2011;19(2):112-120.
14.
Fernández-FairenMSalaPDufooMJrBallesterJMurciaAMerzthalL. Anterior cervical fusion with tantalum implant: a prospective randomized controlled study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008;33(5):465-472.
15.
FlemisterASJrInfanteAFSandersRWWallingAK. Subtalar arthrodesis for complications of intra-articular calcaneal fractures. Foot Ankle Int. 2000;21(5):392-399.
16.
FlecherXPaproskyWGrilloJCAubaniacJMArgensonJN. Do tantalum components provide adequate primary fixation in all acetabular revisions?Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2010;96(3):235-241.
17.
FriggADougallHBoydSNiggB. Can porous tantalum be used to achieve ankle and subtalar arthrodesis? A pilot study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(1):209-216.
18.
HaddadSLCoetzeeJCEstokRFahrbachKBanelDNalysnykL. Intermediate and long-term outcomes of total ankle arthroplasty and ankle arthrodesis: a systematic review of the literature. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89(9):1899-1905.
19.
HenricsonARydholmU. Use of a trabecular metal implant in ankle arthrodesis after failed total ankle replacement. Acta Orthop. 2010;81(6):745-747.
20.
JägerMWesthoffBWildAKrauspeR. Bone harvesting from the iliac crest. Orthopade. 2005;34(10):976-982, 984, 986-990, 992-994.
21.
JohanssonJEHarrisonJGreenwoodFA. Subtalar arthrodesis for adult traumatic arthritis. Foot Ankle. 1982;2(5):294-298.
22.
KimWYGreidanusNVDuncanCPMasriBAGarbuzDS. Porous tantalum uncemented acetabular shells in revision total hip replacement: two to four year clinical and radiographic results. Hip Int. 2008;18(1):17-22.
23.
KitaokaHBAlexanderIJAdelaarRSNunleyJAMyersonMSSandersM. Clinical rating systems for the ankle-hindfoot, midfoot, hallux, and lesser toes. Foot Ankle Int. 1994;15(7):349-353.
LevineBSporerSDella ValleCJJacobsJJPaproskyW. Porous tantalum in reconstructive surgery of the knee: a review. J Knee Surg. 2007;20(3):185-194.
26.
LevineBRSporerSPoggieRADella ValleCJJacobsJJ. Experimental and clinical performance of porous tantalum in orthopedic surgery. Biomaterials. 2006;27(27):4671-4681.
MatsunoHYokoyamaAWatariFUoMKawasakiT. Biocompatibility and osteogenesis of refractory metal implants, titanium, hafnium, niobium, tantalum and rhenium. Biomaterials. 2001;22(11):1253-1262.
29.
MeneghiniRMLewallenDGHanssenAD. Use of porous tantalum metaphyseal cones for severe tibial bone loss during revision total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(1):78-84.
30.
MyersonMQuillGEJr.Late complications of fractures of the calcaneus. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75(3):331-341.
31.
NiedhartCPingsmannAJürgensCMarrABlattRNiethardFU. Complications after harvesting of autologous bone from the ventral and dorsal iliac crest—a prospective, controlled study. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 2003;141(4):481-486.
32.
RussottiGMCassJRJohnsonKA. Isolated talocalcaneal arthrodesis: a technique using moldable bone graft. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1988;70(10):1472-1478.
33.
SassoRCLeHuecJCShaffreyC; Spine Interbody Research Group. Iliac crest bone graft donor site pain after anterior lumbar interbody fusion: a prospective patient satisfaction outcome assessment. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2005;18(suppl):S77-S81.
34.
ShimkoDAShimkoVFSanderEADicksonKFNaumanEA. Effect of porosity on the fluid flow characteristics and mechanical properties of tantalum scaffolds. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2005;73(2):315-324.
35.
StiehlJB. Trabecular metal in hip reconstructive surgery. Orthopedics. 2005;28(7):662-670.
36.
TrnkaHJEasleyMELamPWAndersonCDSchonLCMyersonMS. Subtalar distraction bone block arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001;83(6):849-854.
37.
UngerASLewisRJGruenT. Evaluation of a porous tantalum uncemented acetabular cup in revision total hip arthroplasty: clinical and radiological results of 60 hips. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20(8):1002-1009.
38.
ZardiackasLDParsellDEDillonLDMitchellDWNunneryLAPoggieR. Structure, metallurgy, and mechanical properties of a porous tantalum foam. J Biomed Mater Res. 2001;58(2):180-187.
39.
ZhangYLiLShiZJWangJLiZH. Porous tantalum rod implant is an effective and safe choice for early-stage femoral head necrosis: a meta-analysis of clinical trials. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2013;23(2):211-217.
