CLINICAL-RESULTS AFTER TARSAL TUNNEL DECOMPRESSION

Citation
Wh. Pfeiffer et A. Cracchiolo, CLINICAL-RESULTS AFTER TARSAL TUNNEL DECOMPRESSION, Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume, 76A(8), 1994, pp. 1222-1230
Citations number
30
Categorie Soggetti
Orthopedics,Surgery
ISSN journal
00219355
Volume
76A
Issue
8
Year of publication
1994
Pages
1222 - 1230
Database
ISI
SICI code
0021-9355(1994)76A:8<1222:CATTD>2.0.ZU;2-E
Abstract
We reviewed the clinical results for thirty patients (thirty-two feet) who had had exploration and decompression of the posterior tibial ner ve for the treatment of tarsal tunnel syndrome between 1982 and 1990. The average duration of follow-up was thirty-one months (range, twenty -four to 118 months). Most of the patients were female, and the averag e age was forty-seven years (range, thirteen to seventy-two years). Ov er-all, only fourteen (44 per cent) of the thirty-two feet benefited m arkedly from the operative procedure (a good or excellent result). Of the five patients (five feet) who were completely satisfied, three had another lesion (a ganglion cyst, an accessory navicular bone, or a me dial talocalcaneal coalition) in or near the tarsal tunnel that had be en treated at the same time. Eleven patients (twelve feet [38 per cent ]) were clearly dissatisfied with the result and had no long-term reli ef of the pain (a poor result). The pain was decreased in six feet (19 per cent), but the patients still had some pain and disability (a fai r result). There were four complications (13 per cent): three wound in fections and one delay in wound-healing. Twenty-two feet had had preop erative electrodiagnostic studies; the results of eighteen studies wer e considered abnormal and supportive of a diagnosis of tarsal tunnel s yndrome. However, there was no correlation between the clinical outcom e at the latest follow-up visit and the results of these studies. Over -all, the patients in the current series had less improvement than tho se who have been reported on previously. This may be due to our more s tringent postoperative rating system, to the longer duration of follow -up compared with that in most other reports, to the fact that many of our patients had had a previous operation on the foot to relieve the pain, or to the possibility that another lesion had been responsible f or the pain. Our findings suggest that, unless there is an associated lesion near or within the tarsal tunnel preoperatively, decompression of the posterior tibial nerve should be considered with caution.