ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Total ankle arthroplasty (TAA), tibiotalar (TT) arthrodesis and tibiotalocalcaneal (TTC) arthrodesis are common surgical procedures that are sometimes concurrent. The functional results of TTC are deemed to be inferior because of the double joint sacrifice. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs), as well as satisfaction scores, are commonly used to assess the outcome of these surgeries, but lack at capturing patients' ability to cope with potential functional limitations. The objective of our study was to compare the results of TAA, TT and TTC arthrodeses according to patients' point of view. We proposed two hypotheses: 1) TAA confer better results than TT arthrodeses, 2) and TT arthrodeses confer better results than TTC arthrodeses, on this specific criterion. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We carried out a retrospective study integrating all TAA, TT and TTC arthrodeses performed in our center from 2010 to 2017. These surgeries were compared using PROMs (Foot Function Index (FFI), Foot and Ankle Outcome Scale (FAOS) and 12-Item Short Form Survey (SF-12)), a satisfaction rating and self-reported perceived recovery state. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were included in the TAA group, 50 in the TT group and 51 in the TTC group. The mean duration of follow-up was 46±20.8 months. The TAA group had better results than the TT group regarding the FFI score and satisfaction, thus confirming our primary hypothesis. On the other hand, no significant difference was found between the TT group and the TTC group, which invalidated our secondary hypothesis. No significant difference between the groups was found regarding the distribution of patients' perceived recovery state. CONCLUSION: Our hypothesis was not confirmed. In fact, TAAs, TT and TTC arthrodeses presented substantially similar results. Although it is difficult to compare surgeries with different indications, it is surprising to find that the patients' perceived recovery state, deviating from the usual clinical and radiological results, are relatively similar. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV; Retrospective study.
