THE OPERATIVE TREATMENT OUTCOMES OF CHRONIC HINDFOOT PAIN WITH POSTERIOR ANKLE ENDOSCOPY

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess the outcome of hindfoot endoscopy and to show the availability of this technique by short- to mid-term outcomes on 27 consecutive patients. Methods: A case series of 27 patients, mean age 19-63(mean37.6) ,15 man and 12 woman, diagnosed and treated for chronic hindfoot pain were included for the study between 2010-2016 All these patients were initially treated conservatively. If conservative treatment is insufficient to alleviate symptoms, posterior ankle endoscopy is performed. Patient data included age, gender, the location and the pattern of foot, follow-up, the time delay from symptom onset to operation, surgeries, the length of hospitalization, the pain scores (AOFAS, VAS), time to return to work, and complications. Results: The indications for 27 patients were posterior ankle impingement syndrome (n:8), isolated flexor hallucis longus (FHL) tenosynovitis (n:7),loose body (n:2),subtalar joint arthrosis (n:3),achyl tendinitis (n:1) and peritendinitis(n:6). Symptom duration until operation was 6-22 months (mean 13.2 months). The patients who underwent arthroscopic surgery resumed to their work a mean time of 2-6 months (mean 2.5 months) after the surgery. All patients returned to their previous lives without any limitation or recurrence. Mean follow-up 46.5 months (21-96 months). AOFAS score was preoperative 44-63 (mean 51.4) and postoperative was 92-100 (mean 96.37). The VAS score was preop 5-8 (mean 6.4) and postop 0-2 (mean 0.62). One patient had a partial arterial injury that was repaired, and four patients had mild joint stiffness. Conclusion: Functional and clinical evaluations following hindfoot endoscopy revealed that all patients were very satisfied. Thus, posterior ankle endoscopy is an effective, elegant and rewarding treatment method in the case of continuing chronic hindfoot pain after failed non-surgical treatment modalities.

Keywords:

Hindfoot posterior ankle, endoscopy,

PDF

___

1. Hamilton, W.G., Geppert, M.J., Thompson, F.M. Pain in the posterior aspect of the ankle in dancers. Differential diagnosis and operative treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 78(10):1491–1500 14, 1996. Doi: 10.2106/00004623-199610000-00006.
2. Hedrick, M.R, McBride, A.M. Posterior ankle impingement. Foot Ankle Int, 15(1):2–8, 1994. Doi: 10.1177/107110079401500102.
3. van Dijk, C.N. Hindfoot arthroscopy. Foot Ankle Clin, 11(2):391–414, 2006. Doi: 10.1016/j.fcl.2006.03.002.
4. Abramowitz, Y., Wollstein, R., Barzilay, Y., et al. Outcome of resection of a symptomatic os trigonum. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 85:10511057, 2003. Doi: 10.2106/00004623-200306000-00010.
5. Bulstra, G.H., Olsthoorn, P.G., van Dijk, C. N. Endoscopy of the posterior tibial tendon. Foot Ankle Clin, 11(2):421–427 2, 2006. Doi: 10.1016/j.fcl.2006.03.001.
6. Chow, H.T., Chan, K.B., Lui, T.H. Tendoscopic debridement for stage I posterior tibial tendon dysfunction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 13(8):695–698, 2005. Doi: 10.1007/s00167-005-0635-8.
7. Williams, M.M., Ferkel, R.D. Subtalar arthroscopy: Indications, technique, and results. Arthroscopy Mar; 20(1):93-108., 1998. Doi: 10.1016/j.fcl.2014.10.010.
8. Hamilton, W.G. Stenosing tenosynovitis of the ﬂexor hallucis longus tendon and posterior impingement upon the os trigonum in ballet dancers. Foot Ankle, Sep-Oct; 3(2):74-80, 1982. Doi: 10.1177/107110078200300204.
9. Lawson, J.P. extremities. Radiology, Dec; 157(3):625-31, 1985. Doi: 10.1148/radiology.157.3.4059550
10. Jesus, V., Jordi, V., Maria, M., et. Al.Hindfooft endoscopy for the treatment of posterior ankle impingement syndrome: A safe reproducible technique. Foot and Ankle Surgery, Sep; 20(3):174-9, 2014. Doi: 10.1016/j.fas.2014.03.002
11. Tey, M., Monllau, J.C., Centenera, J.M., Pelfort, X. Beneﬁts of arthroscopic tuberculoplasty in posterior ankle impingement syndrome. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, Oct; 15(10):1235-9, 2007. Doi: 10.1007/s00167-007-0349-1
12. Scholten, P.E., Sierevelt, I.N., van Dijk, C.N. Hindfoot endoscopy for posterior ankle impingement. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 90(12):2665–2672, 2008. Doi: 10.2106/JBJS.F.00188.
13. Tahir, O., Egemen, A., Kaan, I, Abdullah, I.S., Endoscopic treatment of posterior ankle pain.Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 19:1355–1361, 2011. Doi: 10.1007/s00167-011-1428-x
14. Holm, C.L. Primary synovial chondromatosis of the ankle. A case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am, Sep; 58(6):878-80, 1976.
15. Amendola, A., Petrik, J., Webster-Bogaert, S. Ankle arthroscopy: outcome in 79 consecutive patients. Arthroscopy 12(5):565–573, 1996. Doi: 10.1016/s0749-8063(96)90196-6.
16. Spennacchio, P., Cucchid, R.P., van dijk, N.C. Evidence-based indications for hindfoot endoscopy. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, Apr; 24(4):1386-95, 2016. Doi: 10.1007/s00167-015-3965-1
17. Feiwell, L.A., Frey, C. Anatomic study of arthroscopic portal sites of the ankle. Foot Ankle, 14(3):142-147, 1993. Doi: 10.1177/107110079301400306.
18. Nickisch, F., Barg, A, Saltzman, C.L. Postoperative complications of posterior ankle and hindfoot arthroscopy. J Bone Joint Surg Am, Mar 7; 94(5):439-46, 2012.Doi: 10.2106/JBJS.K.00069.
19. Ferkel, R.D., Heath, D.D., Guhl, J.F. Neurological complications of ankle arthroscopy. Arthroscopy. Apr; 12(2):200-8, 1996. Doi: 10.1016/s0749-8063(96)90011-0.