Supramalleolar Osteotomy With or Without Fibular Osteotomy for Varus Ankle Arthritis

Background: Supramalleolar osteotomy (SMOT) is an alternative operative procedure for the management of early and midstage varus ankle arthritis. However, whether fibular osteotomy is needed is controversial. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the functional and radiologic outcomes of pre- and postoperative SMOT, and to compare the outcomes between patients with and without fibular osteotomy. Methods: Forty-one Takakura stage 2 and 3 varus ankle osteoarthritis patients treated with SMOT were included. Fourteen males and 27 females with a mean age of 50.7 (range, 32-71) years were followed with a mean of 36.6 (range, 17-61) months. There were 22 cases with fibular osteotomy and 19 without. The American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot score, Maryland foot score, and Ankle Osteoarthritis Score (AOS) were used for pre- and postoperative functional evaluation. The tibial articular surface angle (TAS), talar tilt (TT), tibiocrural angle (TC), and tibial lateral surface angle (TLS) were evaluated pre- and postoperatively. Results: At the last follow-up, the mean AOFAS score (from 50.8 to 83.1 points) and Maryland score (from 58.3 to 81.6 points) in overall were improved (P < .01); the mean AOS pain (from 42.6 to 26.1 points) and function (from 53.4 to 36.8 points) scores were decreased (P < .01). For radiologic evaluation, all the included parameters were improved (P < .05) except TLS. The mean Takakura stage was decreased (P < .01). No significant difference could be detected in comparing the functional outcomes between those with and without fibular osteotomy. However, in the fibular osteotomy group, TT was decreased (P < .05) and TC was improved (P < .01) significantly. Conclusion: SMOT was promising, with substantial functional improvement and malalignment correction for varus ankle arthritis. Fibular osteotomy may be necessary in cases with large TT and small TC angles. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study.