Talar Dome Access Through Posteromedial Surgical Intervals for Fracture Care

Standard

Talar Dome Access Through Posteromedial Surgical Intervals for Fracture Care. / DeKeyser, Graham J; O'Neill, Dillon C; Sripanich, Yantarat; Lenz, Amy L; Saltzman, Charles L; Haller, Justin M; Barg, Alexej.

In: FOOT ANKLE INT, Vol. 43, No. 2, 02.2022, p. 223-232.

Research output: SCORING: Contribution to journalSCORING: Journal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

DeKeyser, GJ, O'Neill, DC, Sripanich, Y, Lenz, AL, Saltzman, CL, Haller, JM & Barg, A 2022, 'Talar Dome Access Through Posteromedial Surgical Intervals for Fracture Care', FOOT ANKLE INT, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 223-232. https://doi.org/10.1177/10711007211036720

APA

DeKeyser, G. J., O'Neill, D. C., Sripanich, Y., Lenz, A. L., Saltzman, C. L., Haller, J. M., & Barg, A. (2022). Talar Dome Access Through Posteromedial Surgical Intervals for Fracture Care. FOOT ANKLE INT, 43(2), 223-232. https://doi.org/10.1177/10711007211036720

Vancouver

DeKeyser GJ, O'Neill DC, Sripanich Y, Lenz AL, Saltzman CL, Haller JM et al. Talar Dome Access Through Posteromedial Surgical Intervals for Fracture Care. FOOT ANKLE INT. 2022 Feb;43(2):223-232. https://doi.org/10.1177/10711007211036720

Bibtex

@article{609ed01f740a439e8410c726186efb65,
title = "Talar Dome Access Through Posteromedial Surgical Intervals for Fracture Care",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Posterior talar body fractures are rare injuries without a consensus surgical approach. This study evaluates the accessible area of the talar dome through 2 posteromedial approach intervals (posteromedial [PM] and modified posteromedial [mPM]) both with and without distraction.METHODS: Ten male cadaveric legs (5 matched pairs) were included. A PM approach, between flexor hallucis longus (FHL) and the tibial neurovascular bundle, and an mPM approach, between FHL and Achilles tendon, was performed on each pair. In total, 4 mm of distraction across the tibiotalar joint was applied with the foot held in neutral position. Accessible dome surface area (DSA) was outlined by drilling with a 1.6-mm Kirschner wire with and without distraction. Specimens were explanted and analyzed by micro-computed tomography with 3-dimensional reconstruction. Primary outcomes were total accessible DSA and sagittal plane access at predetermined intervals.RESULTS: The PM approach allowed access to 19.1% of the talar DSA without distraction and 33.1% of the talar dome with distraction (P < .001). The mPM approach provided access to 20.4% and 35.6% of the talar DSA without and with distraction (P < .001). Both approaches demonstrated similar sagittal plane access at all intervals except the lateral border of the talus, where the mPM approach provided greater access both without distraction (20.5% vs 4.38%, P = .002) and with distraction (34.3% vs 17.8%, P = .02).CONCLUSION: The mPM approach, using an interval between FHL and Achilles tendon, provides similar access to the posterior surface of talar dome and better sagittal plane access to the most lateral portion of the dome. The mPM interval provides the advantage of avoiding direct dissection of the tibial nerve or posterior tibial artery. Using an external fixator for distraction can improve talar dome visualization substantially.LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, Cadaveric Study.",
author = "DeKeyser, {Graham J} and O'Neill, {Dillon C} and Yantarat Sripanich and Lenz, {Amy L} and Saltzman, {Charles L} and Haller, {Justin M} and Alexej Barg",
year = "2022",
month = feb,
doi = "10.1177/10711007211036720",
language = "English",
volume = "43",
pages = "223--232",
journal = "FOOT ANKLE INT",
issn = "1071-1007",
publisher = "AOFAS - American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Talar Dome Access Through Posteromedial Surgical Intervals for Fracture Care

AU - DeKeyser, Graham J

AU - O'Neill, Dillon C

AU - Sripanich, Yantarat

AU - Lenz, Amy L

AU - Saltzman, Charles L

AU - Haller, Justin M

AU - Barg, Alexej

PY - 2022/2

Y1 - 2022/2

N2 - BACKGROUND: Posterior talar body fractures are rare injuries without a consensus surgical approach. This study evaluates the accessible area of the talar dome through 2 posteromedial approach intervals (posteromedial [PM] and modified posteromedial [mPM]) both with and without distraction.METHODS: Ten male cadaveric legs (5 matched pairs) were included. A PM approach, between flexor hallucis longus (FHL) and the tibial neurovascular bundle, and an mPM approach, between FHL and Achilles tendon, was performed on each pair. In total, 4 mm of distraction across the tibiotalar joint was applied with the foot held in neutral position. Accessible dome surface area (DSA) was outlined by drilling with a 1.6-mm Kirschner wire with and without distraction. Specimens were explanted and analyzed by micro-computed tomography with 3-dimensional reconstruction. Primary outcomes were total accessible DSA and sagittal plane access at predetermined intervals.RESULTS: The PM approach allowed access to 19.1% of the talar DSA without distraction and 33.1% of the talar dome with distraction (P < .001). The mPM approach provided access to 20.4% and 35.6% of the talar DSA without and with distraction (P < .001). Both approaches demonstrated similar sagittal plane access at all intervals except the lateral border of the talus, where the mPM approach provided greater access both without distraction (20.5% vs 4.38%, P = .002) and with distraction (34.3% vs 17.8%, P = .02).CONCLUSION: The mPM approach, using an interval between FHL and Achilles tendon, provides similar access to the posterior surface of talar dome and better sagittal plane access to the most lateral portion of the dome. The mPM interval provides the advantage of avoiding direct dissection of the tibial nerve or posterior tibial artery. Using an external fixator for distraction can improve talar dome visualization substantially.LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, Cadaveric Study.

AB - BACKGROUND: Posterior talar body fractures are rare injuries without a consensus surgical approach. This study evaluates the accessible area of the talar dome through 2 posteromedial approach intervals (posteromedial [PM] and modified posteromedial [mPM]) both with and without distraction.METHODS: Ten male cadaveric legs (5 matched pairs) were included. A PM approach, between flexor hallucis longus (FHL) and the tibial neurovascular bundle, and an mPM approach, between FHL and Achilles tendon, was performed on each pair. In total, 4 mm of distraction across the tibiotalar joint was applied with the foot held in neutral position. Accessible dome surface area (DSA) was outlined by drilling with a 1.6-mm Kirschner wire with and without distraction. Specimens were explanted and analyzed by micro-computed tomography with 3-dimensional reconstruction. Primary outcomes were total accessible DSA and sagittal plane access at predetermined intervals.RESULTS: The PM approach allowed access to 19.1% of the talar DSA without distraction and 33.1% of the talar dome with distraction (P < .001). The mPM approach provided access to 20.4% and 35.6% of the talar DSA without and with distraction (P < .001). Both approaches demonstrated similar sagittal plane access at all intervals except the lateral border of the talus, where the mPM approach provided greater access both without distraction (20.5% vs 4.38%, P = .002) and with distraction (34.3% vs 17.8%, P = .02).CONCLUSION: The mPM approach, using an interval between FHL and Achilles tendon, provides similar access to the posterior surface of talar dome and better sagittal plane access to the most lateral portion of the dome. The mPM interval provides the advantage of avoiding direct dissection of the tibial nerve or posterior tibial artery. Using an external fixator for distraction can improve talar dome visualization substantially.LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, Cadaveric Study.

U2 - 10.1177/10711007211036720

DO - 10.1177/10711007211036720

M3 - SCORING: Journal article

C2 - 34384278

VL - 43

SP - 223

EP - 232

JO - FOOT ANKLE INT

JF - FOOT ANKLE INT

SN - 1071-1007

IS - 2

ER -