Abstract/References

Background: When foot necrosis occurs due to lower limb blood flow disorder caused by diabetes or peripheral arterial occlusion, many patients require lower limb amputation. The functional prognosis after lower limb amputation largely depends on whether the heel can be preserved. However, there are many reports that Chopart amputation causes varus and equinus deformity, and is functionally unfavorable. We herein report a case of Chopart amputation performed with muscle balancing. Postoperatively, the foot was not deformed and the patient was able to walk independently with a foot prosthesis. Case: A 78-year-old man presented with ischemic necrosis of his right forefoot. The range of necrosis extended to the central part of the sole, so Chopart amputation was performed. In the operation, to prevent varus and equinus deformity, the Achilles tendon was lengthened, the tibialis anterior tendon was transferred through a tunnel created in the neck of talus, and the peroneus brevis tendon was transferred through a tunnel created in the anterior part of the calcaneus. At the final follow-up 7 years after the operation, no varus or equinus deformity was observed. The patient became able to stand up and walk on his heel without a prosthesis. In addition, step motion was possible by wearing a foot prosthesis.

1. Reyzelman AM, Hadi S, Armstrong DG. Limb salvage with Chopart’s amputation and tendon balancing. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc, 89:100-103, 1999.

2. Green CJ, Bibbo C, McArdle A, Knight C. A Functional Chopart’s Amputation With Tendon Transfers. J Foot Ankle Surg, 60(1):213-217, 2021.

3. Letts M, Pyper A. The modified Chopart’s amputation. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 256:44-49, 1990.

4. Lieberman JR, Jacobs RL, Goldstock L, Durham J, Fuchs MD. Chopart amputation with percutaneous heel cord lengthening. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 296:86-91, 1993.

5. Okawa T, Ando N, Tsuchiya K, Sokubu Setsudan oyobi Gisoku. Saigaiigaku [in Japanese], 14:329-337, 1971. J

6. Yoho RM, Wilson PK, Gerres JA, Freschi S. Chopart’s amputation:a 10-year case study. J Foot Ankle Surg, 47:326-331, 2008.

7. Blanco JS, Herring JA. Congenital Chopart amputation. A functional assessment. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 256:14-21, 1990.

8. DeGere MW, Grady JF. A modification of Chopart’s amputation with ankle and subtalar arthrodesis by using an intramedullary nail. J Foot Ankle Surg, 44(4):281-286, 2005.

9. Krause FG, Pfander G, Henning J, Shafighi M, Weber M. Ankle dorsiflexion arthrodesis to salvage Chopart’s amputation with anterior skin insufficiency. Foot Ankle Int, 34(11):1560-1568, 2013.

10. Godoy-Santos AL, Fonseca FC, de Cesar-Netto C, Bang K, Pires EA, Armstrong DG. Staged salvage of diabetic foot with Chopart amputation and intramedullary nailing. SAGE Open Med Case Rep, 9:2050313X211046732, 2021.

11. Brodell JD Jr, Ayers BC, Baumhauer JF, DiGiovanni BF, Flemister AS, Ketz JP, Oh I. Chopart Amputation: Questioning the Clinical Efficacy of a Long-standing Surgical Option for Diabetic Foot Infection. J Am Acad Orthop Surg, 28(16):684-691, 2020.

12. Schade VL, Roukis TS, Yan JL. Factors associated with successful Chopart amputation in patients with diabetes:a systematic review. Foot Ankle Spec, 3(5):278-284, 2010.

13. Faglia E, Clerici G, Frykberg R, et al. Outcomes of Chopart Amputation in a Tertiary Referral Diabetic Foot Clinic:Data From a Consecutive Series of 83 Hospitalized Patients. J Foot Ankle Surg, 55(2):230-234, 2016.

14. Cohen-Sobel E, Caselli MA, Rizzuto J. Prosthetic management of a Chopart amputation variant. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc, 84(10):505-510, 1994.

15. Heim M. A new orthotic device for Chopart amputees. Orthop Rev, 23(3):249-252, 1994.