Comparison of Intermediate-Term Clinical Outcomes Between Medial and Lateral Osteochondral Lesions of the Talus Treated With Autologous Osteochondral Transplantation
Seung-Myung Choi, Byung-Ki Cho, Chan Kang, Chan-Hong Min
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The conventional operative method to treat an osteochondral lesion of the talus (OLT) is through bone marrow stimulation (BMS). Autologous osteochondral transplantation (AOT) is being used as an alternative option in cases with a large OLT, accompanying subchondral cyst, and/or failed BMS. We aimed to compare the intermediate-term clinical and radiologic results between medial and lateral OLTs after an AOT procedure. METHODS: Among the patients who underwent AOT, 45 cases with at least 3 years' follow-up were included in this retrospective study. We had 15 cases of lateral lesions and selected 30 cases of medial lesions matched for age and gender. Lateral lesions were resurfaced without an osteotomy; medial lesion resurfacing was combined with a medial malleolar osteotomy. Clinical assessment was performed using the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) and Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM). Radiographic assessment included the irregularity of articular surface (subchondral plate), the progression of degenerative arthritis, and the change of the talar tilt. RESULTS: < .001). Delayed union or malunion of the malleolar osteotomy was found in 4 cases (13%) in the medial group. In addition, the progression of joint degeneration was observed in 3 cases (10%) in the medial group. There were no significant differences in the irregularity of articular surface and the change of talar tilt between both groups. CONCLUSION: A comparison between medial and lateral OLTs treated with AOT demonstrated comparable intermediate-term clinical outcomes. However, patients with medial OLT required a longer period to restore ability for daily and sport activities. In addition, we found more complications and higher rate of progression in the radiologic arthritis grade after medial malleolar osteotomy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, retrospective comparative study.