MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415430167 · doi:10.1302/1358-992x.2025.10.053

CT-VERIFIED UNION RATE FOLLOWING ARTHRODESIS OF ANKLE, HINDFOOT, OR MIDFOOT: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

2025· review· en· W4415430167 on OpenAlexaff
Myles Leslie, Christian Schindler, Gareth Rooke, Andrew Dodd

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopaedic Proceedings · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFoot and Ankle Surgery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArthrodesisObservational studyCohortOrthopedic surgeryCohort studyRandomized controlled trialMEDLINERadiography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ankle, hindfoot, and midfoot arthrodesis surgeries are standard procedures performed in orthopaedics to treat pain and functional disabilities caused by various pathologies. While fusions can effectively improve pain and quality of life, non-unions remain a significant concern for surgeons. Traditionally, clinical scales and plain radiographic films determined the success of the fusion. With the increased availability of computed tomography (CT), more surgeons rely on this modality for increased accuracy in determining whether a fusion was successful. Limited studies are available investigating the CT-verified fusion rates of ankle, hindfoot, and midfoot fusions; this study aims to elucidate the overall fusion rate from the current literature. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed following PRISMA guidelines using EMBASE and Medline databases from January 2000 to March 2020. Randomized controlled trials, observational cohort studies, case-control studies, and case series were selected for review if they included more than ten patients whose age was 18 or older and had ankle, hindfoot, or midfoot fusions with 75% of the cohort receiving CT scans postoperatively to evaluate union. The primary outcome was to determine the current fusion rates of ankle, hindfoot, and midfoot arthrodesis surgeries as confirmed by CT. In total, 4,601 citations were screened, resulting in 24 articles being included in the systematic review. A total of 1015 patients were included in the study. The mean age of patients included in the analysis was 55.9 years old, with a mean follow-up of 48 months. The average time from arthrodesis to CT scan was 21.9 weeks. The overall fusion rate for all patients included in the study was 78.7%. Talonavicular joint (TNJ) fusions had the highest rate of CT verified union at 90%, while the fusion rate for hindfoot procedures was 78%. In subgroup analysis, we found that the fusion rate was statistically significantly worse in male patients and those who smoked with odd ratios of 1.53 (p = 0.04) and 1.94 (p = 0.04), respectively. Diabetes did not show a statistically significant effect on union rates. Arthrodesis is often used to treat symptomatic arthritis of the ankle, hindfoot, and midfoot. This review examines the CT-verified fusion rates for these procedures and compares them to plain film radiograph-confirmed fusion rates. As confirmed by CT, the total rate of non-union of all patients undergoing ankle, hindfoot, or midfoot fusions was 21.3%. This should give patients and surgeons pause when discussing the risks of arthrodesis surgery and offers a more accurate value for informed consent. It is not clear, based on the results of this study, if a routine assessment of union based on CT would improve patient outcomes, however, the results may encourage practitioners to obtain a CT scan in the setting of ongoing pain after fusion surgery despite the radiographic appearance of union.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.009
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthopaedic ProceedingsSame topicFoot and Ankle SurgeryFrench-language works237,207