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.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
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.