Double Versus Triple Arthrodesis Fusion Rates: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Hindfoot arthrodesis is often required for end-staged deformities, such as posterior tibial tendon dysfunction, osteoarthritis, or rheumatoid arthritis. Although the need for hindfoot arthrodesis is generally accepted in severe deformities, there is a debate whether a double or triple arthrodesis should be performed. The aim of our systematic review is to review the fusion rates and mean time to fusion in double and triple arthrodesis. A total of 184 articles were identified using the keyword search through the database of articles published from 2005 to 2017. After review by 3 physicians, a total of 13 articles met the eligibility criteria. The reason for double or triple arthrodesis within the studies were posterior tibial tendon dysfunction, tarsal coalition, degenerative joint disease, osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, Charcot Marie Tooth, Multiple Sclerosis, Polio, neuromuscular disorder, cerebral palsy, acrodystrophic neuropathy, clubfoot, post-traumatic, and seronegative arthropathy (spondyloarthritis). Within these 13 studies, there were a total of 343 (6-95) subjects extremities operated on. The overall fusion rate for double arthrodesis was 91.75% (289/315) compared to 92.86% (26/28) triple arthrodesis fusion rate, p value .8370. The mean time to fusion for double arthrodesis was 17.96 ± 7.96 weeks compared to 16.70 ± 8.18 weeks for triple arthrodesis, p value = .8133. There are risks associated with triple arthrodesis including increased surgical times, lateral wound complications, residual deformity, surgical costs and peri-articular arthritis. Given the benefits of double arthrodesis over triple arthrodesis and the nearly equivalent fusion rates and time to fusion, double arthrodesis is an effective alternative to triple arthrodesis. The authors of this systematic review recommend double arthrodesis as the hindfoot fusion procedure of choice.