: BackgroundTotal ankle arthroplasty (TAA) is increasingly used as an alternative to arthrodesis for end-stage ankle arthritis. The extent to which implant bearing type and design evolution influence outcomes and survival remains debated.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and registered on PROSPERO (CRD420251073944). PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were searched for English-language studies (2004-2025) reporting anterior-approach TAA with specified implant generation (I-IV) and bearing type (fixed [FB] vs mobile [MB]). Studies with a QualSyst score ≥ 75% were included. Primary outcomes were American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, visual analogue scale (VAS), range of motion (ROM), complications, and revisions.ResultsForty-two studies comprising 4,271 implants were analyzed (FB: 1,546; MB: 2,725). Functional improvements were mainly driven by implant generation rather than bearing type. ΔAOFAS increased from 33.7 ± 22.3 in Gen II to 44.5 ± 28.3 in Gen IV (P < .001). ΔVAS varied across generations (Gen II 5.8 ± 2.1; Gen III 4.6 ± 2.8; Gen IV 5.46 ± 1.60; all P < .001 vs baseline). MB implants showed lower pre- and postoperative AOFAS scores but comparable ΔAOFAS to FB designs (36.4 vs 37.5; P = .358). MB systems provided greater pain relief (ΔVAS 5.62 vs 4.60; P < .001) but had higher revision rates (12.0% vs 6.2%; P < .001). FB implants achieved superior postoperative ROM gains in plantarflexion (+6.0° vs -2.9°; P < .001) and dorsiflexion (+2.71° vs +0.75°; P < .001). Excluding Gen I, complication rates decreased from 32.6% in Gen II to 18.8% in Gen III and 10.3% in Gen IV (all P < .01); revision rates declined from 16.5% (Gen II) and 9.6% (Gen III) to 0.5% (Gen IV) (P < .01).ConclusionsImplant generation is the primary determinant of outcomes, complications, and survival in anterior-approach TAA. Bearing type played a secondary role: MB devices provided greater pain relief, whereas FB systems achieved superior ROM recovery and lower revision risk. Fourth-generation implants yielded the most reliable results. Further prospective studies with standardized functional and kinematic assessments are warranted.Level of Clinical Evidence:Level I-Systematic Review/Meta-Analysis.

Gardini, G., Caravelli, S., Cassanelli, E., Cerasoli, T., Cimatti, P., Del Piccolo, N., et al. (2026). Influence of Implant Design on Clinical Outcomes, Complications, and Revisions Rate in Anterior Approach Total Ankle ArthroplastyA Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. FOOT & ANKLE SPECIALIST, 1, 1-13 [10.1177/19386400251414323].

Influence of Implant Design on Clinical Outcomes, Complications, and Revisions Rate in Anterior Approach Total Ankle ArthroplastyA Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Gardini, Giammarco;Caravelli, Silvio;Cassanelli, Edoardo;Cerasoli, Tosca;Cimatti, Pietro;Del Piccolo, Nicolandrea;Marcheggiani Muccioli, Giulio Maria;Mosca, Massimiliano
2026

Abstract

: BackgroundTotal ankle arthroplasty (TAA) is increasingly used as an alternative to arthrodesis for end-stage ankle arthritis. The extent to which implant bearing type and design evolution influence outcomes and survival remains debated.MethodsA systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and registered on PROSPERO (CRD420251073944). PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were searched for English-language studies (2004-2025) reporting anterior-approach TAA with specified implant generation (I-IV) and bearing type (fixed [FB] vs mobile [MB]). Studies with a QualSyst score ≥ 75% were included. Primary outcomes were American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, visual analogue scale (VAS), range of motion (ROM), complications, and revisions.ResultsForty-two studies comprising 4,271 implants were analyzed (FB: 1,546; MB: 2,725). Functional improvements were mainly driven by implant generation rather than bearing type. ΔAOFAS increased from 33.7 ± 22.3 in Gen II to 44.5 ± 28.3 in Gen IV (P < .001). ΔVAS varied across generations (Gen II 5.8 ± 2.1; Gen III 4.6 ± 2.8; Gen IV 5.46 ± 1.60; all P < .001 vs baseline). MB implants showed lower pre- and postoperative AOFAS scores but comparable ΔAOFAS to FB designs (36.4 vs 37.5; P = .358). MB systems provided greater pain relief (ΔVAS 5.62 vs 4.60; P < .001) but had higher revision rates (12.0% vs 6.2%; P < .001). FB implants achieved superior postoperative ROM gains in plantarflexion (+6.0° vs -2.9°; P < .001) and dorsiflexion (+2.71° vs +0.75°; P < .001). Excluding Gen I, complication rates decreased from 32.6% in Gen II to 18.8% in Gen III and 10.3% in Gen IV (all P < .01); revision rates declined from 16.5% (Gen II) and 9.6% (Gen III) to 0.5% (Gen IV) (P < .01).ConclusionsImplant generation is the primary determinant of outcomes, complications, and survival in anterior-approach TAA. Bearing type played a secondary role: MB devices provided greater pain relief, whereas FB systems achieved superior ROM recovery and lower revision risk. Fourth-generation implants yielded the most reliable results. Further prospective studies with standardized functional and kinematic assessments are warranted.Level of Clinical Evidence:Level I-Systematic Review/Meta-Analysis.
2026
Gardini, G., Caravelli, S., Cassanelli, E., Cerasoli, T., Cimatti, P., Del Piccolo, N., et al. (2026). Influence of Implant Design on Clinical Outcomes, Complications, and Revisions Rate in Anterior Approach Total Ankle ArthroplastyA Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. FOOT & ANKLE SPECIALIST, 1, 1-13 [10.1177/19386400251414323].
Gardini, Giammarco; Caravelli, Silvio; Cassanelli, Edoardo; Cerasoli, Tosca; Cimatti, Pietro; Del Piccolo, Nicolandrea; Marcheggiani Muccioli, Giulio ...espandi
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/1044007
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 1
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact