Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics | Vol 7 | Issue 1 |  Jan-Jun 2022 | page: 60-63 | Cok Gde Oka Dharmayuda, Dewa Gede Bracika, Kenji Arnaya, Sri Mahadana, Putu Teguh Aryanugraha, Benedictus Deriano, Nariswati Anggapadmi Wiraputri, I Ketut Gede Surya Pranata

DOI:10.13107/jcorth.2022.v07i01.473

Author: Cok Gde Oka Dharmayuda [1], Dewa Gede Bracika [2], Kenji Arnaya [2], Sri Mahadana [2], Putu Teguh Aryanugraha [2], Benedictus Deriano [2], Nariswati Anggapadmi Wiraputri [2], I Ketut Gede Surya Pranata [2]

[1] Consultant of Orthopaedic and Traumatogy Department, Faculty of Medicine Udayana University, Indonesia.

[2] Resident of Orthopaedic and Traumatogy Department, Faculty of Medicine Udayana University, Indonesia.

Address of Correspondence
Dr. Cok Gde Oka Dharmayuda,
Diponegoro St., Dauh Puri Klod, Kec. Denpasar Bar., Kota Denpasar, Bali 80113, Indonesia.
E-mail: suthenoandrew@gmail.com

Abstract

Charcot neuropathic osteoarthropathy or neuroarthropathy of the foot and ankle is due to sensory and motor neuropathies which lead to a chronic and progressive destruction of the foot architecture involving bones, joints, and soft tissues. The aim of the present study was to compare the results of EF and retrograde IMN in ankle arthrodesis for patients with Charcot neuroarthropathy of the ankle joint. This study conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis statement. Literature Search was done on using the databases of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were systematically retrieved. From the selected databases, 205 references were obtained. By screening the titles and abstracts, 48 references were excluded The remaining potentially relevant 12 studies underwent a detailed and comprehensive evaluation. Finally, five studies were included in our meta-analysis. Based on the report in this meta-analysis, IMN could showed better results compared to EF for Charcot joint arthrodesis, with IMN showing higher rate of fusion, and lesser risk of complication.

Keywords: Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, Charcot Neuroarthropathy, Intramedullary Nailing, External Fixation

References

1. Yammine K, Assi C. Intramedullary nail versus external fixator for ankle arthrodesis in Charcot neuroarthropathy: A meta-analysis of comparative studies. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2019;27:1-7.
2. Cianni L, Bocchi MB, Vitiello R, Greco T, de Marco D, Masci G, et al. Arthrodesis in the Charcot foot: A systematic review. Orthop Rev (Pavia) 2020;12 Suppl 1:8670.
3. Dayton P, Feilmeier M, Thompson M, Whitehouse P, Reimer RA. Comparison of complications for internal and external fixation for charcot reconstruction: A systematic review. J Foot Ankle Surg 2015;54:1072-5.
4. Almaadany FS, Samadov E, Namazov I, Jafarova S, Ramshorst GH, Pattyn P, et al. Mortality and pulmonary complications in patients undergoing surgery with perioperative sars-cov-2 infection: An international cohort study. Lancet 2020;396:27-38.
5. Devries JG, Berlet GC, Hyer CF. A retrospective comparative analysis of charcot ankle stabilization using an intramedullary rod  with or without application of circular external fixator-utilization of the retrograde arthrodesis intramedullary nail database. J  Foot Ankle Surg 2012;51:420-5.
6. Ettinger S, Plaass C, Claassen L, Stukenborg-Colsman C, Yao D, Daniilidis K. Surgical management of charcot deformity for the  Foot and ankle-radiologic outcome after internal/external fixation. J Foot Ankle Surg 2016;55:522-8.
7. Richman J, Cota A, Weinfeld S. Intramedullary nailing and external ring fixation for tibiotalocalcaneal arthrodesis in charcot arthropathy. Foot Ankle Int 2017;38:149-52.
8. Elalfy B, Ali AM, Fawzy SI. Ilizarov external fixator versus retrograde intramedullary nailing for ankle joint arthrodesis in diabetic charcot neuroarthropathy. J Foot Ankle Surg 2017;56:309-13.

 (Abstract    Full Text HTML)   (Download PDF)