Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 5, 2025
Treatment of Ankle Osteoarthritis with Total Ankle Replacement Through a Lateral Transfibular Approach
Published on: January 24, 2018
Assessing the Ankle Joint Line Level Before and After Total Ankle Arthroplasty With the "Joint Line Height Ratio"
Thos Harnroongroj1,2, Amelia Hummel1, Scott J Ellis1
1Foot and Ankle Service, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.
Background:
Restoring the joint line is an important principle in total knee arthroplasty. However, the effect of joint line level on patient outcomes after total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) remains unclear, as there is no established method for measuring ankle joint level in TAA. The objective of this study was to develop a reliable radiographic ankle joint line measurement method and to compare ankle joint line level measured pre-TAA, post-TAA, and in nonarthritic ankles.
Methods:
A total of 112 radiographic sets were analyzed. Each set included weightbearing anteroposterior radiographs of the operative ankle taken preoperatively, 1-year postoperatively, and of the contralateral ankle. Measurements of vertical intermalleolar distance (VIMD) and vertical joint line distance (VJLD) at pre-TAA, post-TAA, and of the contralateral ankle were recorded by 2 authors on 2 separate occasions. The ratio of VJLD to VIMD was defined as the joint line height ratio (JLHR). Reliability of measurements and correlation between VIMD and VJLD were assessed. Pre-TAA, nonarthritic contralateral ankle, and post-TAA JLHR were compared and considered significantly different if P <.05.
Results:
The inter- and intrarater reliability of radiographic measurements was excellent (r > 0.9). There were strong positive correlations of VIMD and VJLD, r = 0.809 (pre-TAA)/0.756 (post-TAA), P < .001. Mean (SD) pre-TAA, nonarthritic contralateral ankle, and post-TAA JLHRs were 1.54 (0.31), 1.39 (0.26), and 1.62 (0.49), respectively. Pre- and post-TAA JLHRs were significantly higher compared to the nonarthritic contralateral ankle (P < .05). JHLR was not significantly different between pre- and post-TAA (P = .15).
Conclusion:
The JLHR was reliable and could be a clinically applicable method for assessing ankle joint line level in patients undergoing TAA. End-stage ankle arthritis demonstrated elevated joint line level compared with nonarthritic ankles, and the joint line level post-TAA remained elevated compared with nonarthritic ankles. Further studies are needed to understand the effect of joint line elevation on clinical outcomes after TAA.
Level Of Evidence:
Level III, retrospective comparative study.
