SpringerLink
Log in

The Hintegra total ankle replacement: survivorship, failure modes and patient reported outcomes in seventy consecutive cases with a minimum five year follow-up

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The Hintegra total ankle replacement (TAR) has been widely used worldwide for ankle arthroplasty since its introduction in 2000. The implant survivorship, patient reported outcomes, rate of periprosthetic cyst formation and reoperation rates are variably reported. The purpose of this study is to determine the functional outcomes and survivorship of the Hintegra TAR, in consecutive cases by multiple surgeons in a single UK institution, with a minimum of five year follow-up.

Methods

A retrospective review of prospectively collected data for 70 consecutive Hintegra TAR cases performed between 2010 and 2014. Data collected included patient demographics, complications, reoperations, revisions and patient reported outcome measures (PROMS: AOS, MOX-FQ, pain VAS and EQ-5D 3L).

Results

Seventy patients underwent Hintegra TAR (54 male/16 female) with an average age of 69 (range 48–84 years). Mean follow up was 76 months (range 60–104), 10 patients died during the follow-up. Implant survivorship was 81.7% at most recent follow-up. The commonest radiographic finding was periprosthetic cysts (n = 28, 40%): size range (7–40 mm). Nine patients required re-operation: six periprosthetic cyst debridement and grafting at a mean of 61 months (range 27–91), one lateral gutter debridement, one periprosthetic fracture and one debridement for deep infection. PROMS data was available for the majority of patients. Mean final follow-up scores were total AOS 35 (range: 0–97), MOX-FQ 36 (range: 2–93), pain VAS 34.6 (range: 0–100) and EQ-5D 3L Index 0.69 (range: 0.08–1.00).

Conclusion

Our experience demonstrates implant survivorship similar to other TAR studies. We have identified a high incidence of periprosthetic cysts and would recommend ongoing surveillance of these patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Glazebrook M, Daniels T, Younger A, Foote CJ, Penner M, Wing K et al (2008) Comparison of health-related quality of life between patients with end-stage ankle and hip arthrosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90(3):499–505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Goldberg AJ, MacGregor A, Dawson J, Singh D, Cullen N, Sharp RJ et al (2012) The demand incidence of symptomatic ankle osteoarthritis presenting to foot & ankle surgeons in the United Kingdom. Foot (Edinb) 22(3):163–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Fuchs S, Sandmann C, Skwara A, Chylarecki C (2003) Quality of life 20 years after arthrodesis of the ankle A study of adjacent joints. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85(7):994–8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Saltzman CL, Kadoko RG, Suh JS (2010) Treatment of isolated ankle osteoarthritis with arthrodesis or the total ankle replacement a comparison of early outcomes. Clin Orthop Surg 2(1):1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Barg A, Zwicky L, Knupp M, Henninger HB, Hintermann B (2013) HINTEGRA total ankle replacement survivorship analysis in 684 patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 95(13):1175–1183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Henricson A, Carlsson A, Rydholm U (2011) What is a revision of total ankle replacement? Foot Ankle Surg 17(3):99–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Krause FG, Di Silvestro M, Penner MJ, Wing KJ, Glazebrook MA, Daniels TR et al (2010) Inter and intraobserver reliability of the COFAS end-stage ankle arthritis classification system. Foot Ankle Int 31(2):103–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dawson J, Boller I, Doll H, Lavis G, Sharp R, Cooke P et al (2011) The MOXFQ patient reported questionnaire assessment of data quality reliability and validity in relation to foot and ankle surgery. Foot (Edinb) 21(2):92–102

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Domsic RT, Saltzman CL (1998) Ankle osteoarthritis scale. Foot Ankle Int 19(7):466–471

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Dawson J, Boller I, Doll H, Lavis G, Sharp R, Cooke P et al (2012) Responsiveness of the Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) compared with AOFAS, SF-36 and EQ-5D assessments following foot or ankle surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br 94(2):215–221

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Glazebrook MA, Arsenault K, Dunbar M (2009) Evidence-based classification of complications in total ankle arthroplasty. Foot Ankle Int 30(10):945–949

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Younger ASE, Glazebrook M, Veljkovic A, Goplen G, Daniels TR, Penner M et al (2016) A coding system for reoperations following total ankle replacement and ankle arthrodesis. Foot Ankle Int 37(11):1157–1164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Yang H-Y, Wang S-H, Lee K-B (2019) The HINTEGRA total ankle arthroplasty functional outcomes and implant survivorship in 210 osteoarthritic ankles at a mean of 64 years. Bone Joint J 101(6):695–701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Zafar MJ, Kallemose T, Benyahia M, Ebskov LB, Penny JØ (2020) 12-year survival analysis of 322 Hintegra total ankle arthroplasties from an independent center. Acta Orthop 91(4):444–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Egglestone A, Kakwani R, Aradhyula M, Kingman A, Townshend D (2020) Outcomes of revision surgery for failed total ankle replacement: revision arthroplasty versus arthrodesis. Int Orthop 44(12):2727–2734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. No Authors Listed. NJR 17th annual report 2020 [Internet]. NJR; [cited 2021 Mar 31]. Available from: https://reports.njrcentre.org.uk/Portals/0/PDFdownloads/NJR%2017th%20Annual%20Report%202020.pdf

  17. Clough T, Bodo K, Majeed H, Davenport J, Karski M (2019) Survivorship and long term outcome of a consecutive series of 200 Scandinavian Total Ankle Replacement (STAR) implants. Bone Joint J 101(1):47–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Fevang B-TS, Lie SA, Havelin LI, Brun JG, Skredderstuen A, Furnes O (2007) 257 ankle arthroplasties performed in Norway between 1994 and 2005. Acta Orthop 78(5):575–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Zaidi R, Cro S, Gurusamy K, Siva N, Macgregor A, Henricson A et al (2013) The outcome of total ankle replacement a systematic review and meta-analysis. Bone Joint J 95(11):1500–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lefrancois T, Younger A, Wing K, Penner MJ, Dryden P, Wong H et al (2017) A prospective study of four total ankle arthroplasty implants by non-designer investigators. J Bone Joint Surg Am 99(4):342–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Deleu P-A, DevosBevernage B, Gombault V, Maldague P, Leemrijse T (2015) Intermediate-term results of mobile-bearing total ankle replacement. Foot Ankle Int 36(5):518–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Najefi A-A, Ghani Y, Goldberg AJ (2020) Bone cysts and osteolysis in ankle replacement. Foot Ankle Int 16:1071100720955155

    Google Scholar 

  23. Gougoulias N, Khanna A, Maffulli N (2010) How successful are current ankle replacements? a systematic review of the literature. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(1):199–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Yoon HS, Lee J, Choi WJ, Lee JW (2014) Periprosthetic osteolysis after total ankle arthroplasty. Foot Ankle Int 35(1):14–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kohonen I, Koivu H, Pudas T, Tiusanen H, Vahlberg T, Mattila K (2013) Does computed tomography add information on radiographic analysis in detecting periprosthetic osteolysis after total ankle arthroplasty? Foot Ankle Int 34(2):180–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Koivu H, Kohonen I, Sipola E, Alanen K, Vahlberg T, Tiusanen H (2009) Severe periprosthetic osteolytic lesions after the ankle evolutive system total ankle replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 91(7):907–914

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Knecht SI, Estin M, Callaghan JJ, Zimmerman MB, Alliman KJ, Alvine FG et al (2004) The agility total ankle arthroplasty Seven to sixteen year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86(6):1161–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Espinosa N, Klammer G, Wirth SH (2017) Osteolysis in total ankle replacement how does it work? Foot Ankle Clin 22(2):267–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. North Tyneside General Hospital, Rake Lane, North Shields, NE29 8NH, UK

    Laura J. Clifton, Paul R. P. Rushton, Rajesh Kakwani, Jonathan Coorsh & David N. Townshend

  2. Hexham General Hospital, Corbridge Road, Hexham, NE46 1QJ, UK

    Anji Kingman

  3. Wansbeck General Hospital, Woodhorn Lane, Ashington, NE63 9JJ, UK

    An Murty

Authors
  1. Laura J. Clifton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anji Kingman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paul R. P. Rushton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. An Murty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Rajesh Kakwani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jonathan Coorsh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. David N. Townshend
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Laura J Clifton, Anji Kingman and Paul RP Rushton. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Laura J Clifton and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laura J. Clifton.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

Institutional ethical approval was granted for data collection.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent to publication

Not applicable.

Conflict of interest

David N Townshend was paid faculty for a Hintegra TAR course. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Clifton, L.J., Kingman, A., Rushton, P.R.P. et al. The Hintegra total ankle replacement: survivorship, failure modes and patient reported outcomes in seventy consecutive cases with a minimum five year follow-up. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 45, 2331–2336 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-021-05071-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-021-05071-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation