Transtibial amputation outcomes study (TAOS): Comparing transtibial amputation with and without a tibiofibular synostosis (Ertl) procedure

26Citations
Citations of this article
65Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The optimal technique for a transtibial amputation in a young, active, and healthy patient is controversial. Proponents of the Ertl procedure (in which the cut ends of the tibia and fibula are joined with a bone bridge synostosis) argue that the residual limb is more stable which confers better prosthetic fit and improved function especially among high-performing individuals. At the same time, the Ertl procedure is associated with longer operative and healing time and may be associated with a higher complication rate compared with the standard Burgess procedure. The TAOS is a prospective, multicenter randomized trial comparing 18-month outcomes after transtibial amputation using the Ertl versus Burgess approach among adults aged 18 to 60. The primary outcomes include surgical treatment for a complication and patient-reported function. Secondary outcomes include physical impairment, pain, and treatment cost.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bosse, M. J., Morshed, S., Reider, L., Ertl, W., Toledano, J., Firoozabadi, R., … Owens, C. D. (2017). Transtibial amputation outcomes study (TAOS): Comparing transtibial amputation with and without a tibiofibular synostosis (Ertl) procedure. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, 31, S63–S69. https://doi.org/10.1097/BOT.0000000000000791

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free