Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026.
World J Orthop. Jun 18, 2026; 17(6): 119597
Published online Jun 18, 2026. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v17.i6.119597
Published online Jun 18, 2026. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v17.i6.119597
Table 1 Stage-based management of Charcot neuroarthropathy
| Stage | Clinical features | Main treatment |
| Stage 0 | Warmth, swelling, subtle imaging changes | Immediate immobilization and offloading |
| Stage I | Fragmentation, active destruction | Non-removable knee-high offloading, close monitoring |
| Stage II | Coalescence | Protected progression, orthotic planning |
| Stage III | Consolidated deformity | Custom bracing or reconstruction if non-plantigrade/unstable |
Table 2 Main fixation options for tibiotalocalcaneal fusion in Charcot hindfoot and ankle disease
| Method | Advantages | Limitations |
| Retrograde intramedullary nail | Load sharing, spans ankle and subtalar joints, limited stripping | Implant failure, nonunion, infection |
| Plate fixation | Alignment control, useful when nailing unsuitable | Wider exposure, soft-tissue risk |
| External fixation | Useful in infection or poor soft tissue | Pin-related problems, patient burden |
| Hybrid fixation | Added stability in selected salvage cases | Complexity and limited evidence |
- Citation: Emara KM, Eissa MO. Tibiotalocalcaneal fusion in Charcot ankle arthropathy: Technical and biological considerations. World J Orthop 2026; 17(6): 119597
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2218-5836/full/v17/i6/119597.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v17.i6.119597