Comparison of Osteochondral Autografts and Allografts for Treatment of Recurrent or Large Talar Osteochondral Lesions

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate and compare the long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of using osteochondral autograft and allograft to manage either recurrent or large osteochondral lesions of the talar dome (OLT) in a single surgeon’s practice. Methods: Between January 2008 and January 2014, a total of 40 patients presented with either a recurrent OLT that failed initial arthroscopic treatment (ie, excision, curettage, debridement, and micro-fracture) or a primary OLT greater than 1.5 cm2 that had undergone no prior surgery. Before surgery, 20 patients were randomized to receive osteochondral autograft plugs (Arthrex, Naples, FL) from the ipsilateral superolateral distal femoral condyle whereas the remaining 20 were randomized to receive osteochondral allograft plugs from a fresh size-matched donor talus (Joint Restoration Foundation, Centennial, CO, and Arthrex, Naples, FL), but 4 of these were excluded that received a hemi-talus allograft with internal fixation. Preoperative and postoperative function and pain was graded using the Foot and Ankle Ability Measures (FAAM) scoring system and a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) of pain, respectively. Radiographs were assessed for osteochondral graft healing, joint congruency, and degenerative changes. Data regarding postoperative complications and revision surgeries were also recorded. Results: Of the 20 patients who received osteochondral autograft, the mean FAAM score increased from 54.4 preoperatively to 85.5 at the time of final follow-up. The mean VAS pain score decreased from 7.9 of 10 preoperatively to 2.2 of 10 at final follow-up. Two patients (10%) that received osteochondral autograft, 1 for a recurrent OLT of 1.3 cm2 and 1 for a primary OLT of 2.0 cm2, developed a symptomatic nonunion at the entire graft site. Both of these patients had their autograft converted to talar allograft plugs and achieved full osteochondral healing. At the time of final follow-up, no patients who received osteochondral autograft developed ankle degenerative changes or knee complications. The mean FAAM score of the 16 patients who received osteochondral allograft plugs increased from 55.2 preoperatively to 80.7 at the time of final follow-up. This postoperative score was lower than that of the osteochondral autograft group, but not to a statistically significant degree ( P = .25). The mean VAS pain score decreased from 7.8 of 10 preoperatively to 2.7 of 10 at final follow-up. This postoperative score was higher than that of the osteochondral autograft group but not to a statistically significant degree ( P = .15). Three patients (18.8%) that received osteochondral talar allograft, 2 for recurrent OLTs less than 1.5 cm2 and 1 for a primary OLT of 2.2 cm2, developed a symptomatic nonunion at the entire graft site. Two of these 3 patients had their allograft converted to osteochondral autograft plugs harvested from the ipsilateral superolateral distal femoral condyle and achieved full osteochondral healing. At the time of final follow-up, 1 of these 16 (6.3%) patients who received talar allograft as OLT treatment had developed asymptomatic anterior ankle arthritis upon radiographs. Conclusion: Using fresh talar osteochondral allograft provided results that were comparable to the use of distal femoral osteochondral autograft for treating recurrent or large OLTs. Although the use of allograft avoided the risk of knee complications when harvesting autograft from the distal femur, fresh talar allograft may have lower healing rates than osteochondral autograft. Level of Evidence: Level II, comparative case series.