Microfracture for Osteochondral Lesions of the Talus: Perspective 2



Microfracture for Osteochondral Lesions of the Talus: Perspective 2


Raymond J. Walls

Keir A. Ross

Ethan J. Fraser

John G. Kennedy





ANATOMY



  • The talus articulates with the tibial plafond superiorly as well as the medial and lateral malleoli to form the ankle mortise.


  • Approximately 60% of talar surface is covered by cartilage.


  • It has no muscular attachments and thus its blood supply is derived from branches of the posterior tibial artery (artery of the tarsal canal and deltoid branches), the peroneal artery (artery of the tarsal sinus), and the dorsalis pedis.


PATHOGENESIS



  • The etiology is primarily traumatic with an incidence of between 50% and 70% following ankle sprains and fractures.7,11,13


  • Repetitive microtrauma leading to OLTs is often associated with ankle instability.11


  • Impaction, crush, and shearing injuries occur with the location of the OLT dependent on the position of the ankle at time of injury.


NATURAL HISTORY



  • Smaller lesions can occasionally heal with nonoperative management, although this is more commonly seen in a pediatric population.19


  • Theoretically, OLTs tend to progress, as highly pressurized fluid invades the subchondral plate through cartilaginous defects and eventually infiltrates subchondral bone.


  • Spontaneous healing is uncommon and there is a propensity for further degeneration.


  • Prevention of disease progression is aimed at repair of the subchondral plate and alignment of the joint.


  • Surgical intervention can be considered as reparative (BMS) or replacement (autologous chondrocyte implantation, autologous osteochondral transplantation, juvenile particulate cartilage).


PATIENT HISTORY AND PHYSICAL FINDINGS



  • OLTs may be asymptomatic.


  • Patients often, but not always, will recall an acute injury.


  • Activity-related deep anterior ankle pain is the typical complaint.


  • Mechanical symptoms such as clicking or locking of the ankle joint are less common and may indicate a loose fragment.


  • Clinical examination may reveal swelling and localized tenderness along the joint line.


  • Chronic cases with associated synovitis and joint effusions can have limited ankle motion.


  • As many cases occur with concomitant pathology, such as ankle instability, detailed clinical examination of the ankle osseous, ligamentous, and tendinous structures is advocated.


IMAGING AND OTHER DIAGNOSTIC STUDIES



  • Imaging studies are useful to assess lesion location, size, and depth as well as the presence of subchondral cysts preoperatively. This will determine the most appropriate treatment strategy.


  • Standard weight-bearing plain radiographs (anteroposterior [AP], lateral, and mortise views) (FIG 1A)



    • May miss up to 50% of OLTs, especially if very small or isolated cartilage lesions9


    • Useful to assess lower limb, ankle, and hindfoot alignment


  • Computed tomography (CT) (FIG 1B,C)



    • Permits further evaluation of osseous morphology and dimensions, especially depth


    • Only gives information about the osseous structure; no information regarding overlying chondral loss or damage


  • Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (FIG 1D,E)



    • Recommended for a definitive diagnosis and evaluation


    • Evaluation of articular cartilage and the degree of subchondral involvement/bone edema


    • T2 mapping sequences provide increased sensitivity for cartilage architecture and quality.


    • Can also assess for concomitant pathology (ligamentous injury, tendinous injury, loose bodies, etc)


DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS



  • Anteromedial or anterolateral ankle impingement


  • Chronic ankle instability


  • Tendinopathy (peroneals, tibialis posterior, tibialis anterior)


  • Early posttraumatic osteoarthritis


  • Inflammatory arthropathy


  • Stress response or fracture







FIG 1A. AP plain radiograph demonstrating an osteochondral lesion of the medial talar dome. B. Midsagittal CT image of an OLT. C. Midcoronal CT image. D. Midsagittal MRI scan of an OLT. E. Midcoronal MRI scan.


NONOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT



  • Indicated for minimally symptomatic, smaller, stable lesions that involve cartilage alone


  • A period of immobilization and restricted weight bearing followed by progressive weight bearing and physical therapy. Range-of-motion exercises are encouraged to preserve cartilage nutrition.


  • Pharmacotherapy (oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs [NSAIDs] and intra-articular steroid injection)


  • Nonoperative management has traditionally shown high failure rates.5,15,21


  • The role of biologic adjuncts such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP), concentrated bone marrow aspirate (CBMA), and hyaluronic acid (HA) are under investigation.


SURGICAL MANAGEMENT



  • Microfracture was first described by Steadman et al17 and has gained widespread popularity, as it is marginally technically demanding, minimally invasive with minimal postoperative pain, is low cost, and is associated with low complication rates.


  • Indications



    • Primary noncystic lesions3,4 that are less than 15 mm in diameter or have an area less than 150 mm2


    • Failed conservative management


    • Consider retrograde drilling for subchondral bone lesions where the overlying cartilage is intact.


  • Absolute contraindications include severe degenerative joint disease and infection. Caution is recommended in the setting of active inflammatory arthropathy, especially if the patient is on long-term oral steroids.


Preoperative Planning

Jul 24, 2016 | Posted by in ORTHOPEDIC | Comments Off on Microfracture for Osteochondral Lesions of the Talus: Perspective 2

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access