Treatment of Talus Fractures: a Retrospective Study (TTF2017)

August 16, 2018 updated by: Carlo Biz, University of Padova

Long-term Radiographic and Clinical-functional Outcomes of Isolated, Displaced, Closed Talar Neck and Body Fractures Treated by Open Reduction Iternal Fixation: the Timing of Surgical Management.

The main purpose of this retrospective case series study was to evaluate long-term radiographic and clinical outcomes of a consecutive series of patients with diagnosis of isolated, displaced, closed talar neck or body fractures treated by open reduction and internal fixation. Secondly, it was aimed to verify the influence of the location of talar fractures on the outcomes, the prognostic value of the Hawkins sign, whether operative delays promote avascular necrosis (AVN) and if the fractures require emergent surgical management.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

From January 2007 to December 2012, 31 patients underwent ORIF by screws at our institution. On the basis of Inokuchi criteria, the injuries were divided between neck and body fractures, which were classified according to Hawkins and Sneppen, respectively. The patients included were divided into two groups in relation to fracture location and complexity. Radiographic assessment focused on reduction quality, bone healing, Hawkins sign and osteoarthritis development. For clinical evaluation, clinical-functional scores (AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot Score; MFS; FFI-17; SF-36) and VAS were determined, and statistical analysis was performed.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Observational

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
40

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

14 years to 81 years (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

There were 19 men (1 bilateral case for a total of 20 fractures, 71.4%) and 8 women (29.6%). Overall, mean age at the time of injury was 38.3 years old (range 18-81)

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • diagnosis of a closed, isolated, displaced talar neck or body fracture with 2 or more millimetres displacement, subsequently treated by ORIF
  • age between 18 and 85 years
  • informed consent to participate.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • undisplaced fractures or involvement of both the neck and the body,
  • open fractures, talar head and peripheral fractures including posterior process, osteochondral fractures, primary arthrodesis or amputation,
  • history of severe neurological deficit,
  • previous foot surgery or trauma,
  • diagnosis of rheumathological diseases or psoriatic arthritis, foot neuropathy, severe vascular insufficiency and alcohol or drug abuse.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Observational Models: Case-Only
  • Time Perspectives: Retrospective

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Evaluation of the quality reduction after surgery
Time Frame: at day 1 after surgery
Radiographic examination of anteroposterior, lateral and oblique view radiographs enabled to evaluate the quality of the reduction. Any offset of more than 2 mm or neck angulation of more than 5° between the fragment was labelled as a poor reduction.
at day 1 after surgery
Evaluation of bone healing
Time Frame: at different follow-ups (1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months)

Criteria to define bone healing and union:

The bridging bone/callus formation was evaluated on radiographs The absence of radiolucent lines was verified at different follow-ups.
at different follow-ups (1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months)
Evaluation of osteonecrosis
Time Frame: at 6-8 weeks after injury
The Hawkins sign appearance (only on the A/P X-ray), which resembles a subchondral atrophy in the talus dome, was evaluated indicating that the talus is well vascularized. On the contrary, its absence at this time suggests the presence of osteonecrosis
at 6-8 weeks after injury
Evaluation of the development of post-injury peritalar osteoarthritis
Time Frame: at last follow-up (seven years)
Post-injury peritalar osteoarthritis was evaluated on X-ray and differentiated between necrosis without collapse (sclerosis with and without geodes) and necrosis with collapse of the talar dome at the last follow-up
at last follow-up (seven years)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot score
Time Frame: at last follow-up (seven years)
The AOFAS score enabled to quantify pain and functional disability. It includes 9 questions related to pain (1 question; 40 points), function (7 questions; 50 points) and alignment (10 questions; 10 points); a score of 90-100 is considered an excellent result; 75-89 as good; 50-74 as fair and less than 49 points is considered a failure or a poor outcome.
at last follow-up (seven years)
the Maryland Foot Score (MFS)
Time Frame: at last follow-up (seven years)
The MFS is a score conceptually analogous to AOFAS score, but points are differently distributed (45 for pain, 55 for functional limitation); they indicate excellent results if the score is between 90 to 100, good for a score of 75 to 89, fair for a score of 50 to 74 and poor if the score is < 50.
at last follow-up (seven years)
the 17-Foot Functional Index (FFI-17)
Time Frame: at last follow-up (seven years)
The FFI-17 measures the persistence of pain, disability and restriction of activity, with 17 number-rating scales from 0 to 10. The maximum score is 100, which indicates complete disability.
at last follow-up (seven years)

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
University of Padova

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: Carlo Biz, MD, Padua University Orthopaedic Clinic

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
January 1, 2007

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
December 31, 2012

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
February 28, 2018

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
July 31, 2018

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
August 16, 2018

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
August 21, 2018

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
August 21, 2018

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
August 16, 2018

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
August 1, 2018

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • 4065/AO/17

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

No

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings