Comparison of 4 different techniques in first metatarsophalangeal joint arthrodesis
- 23 Downloads
The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes and fusion rates of 4 different methods of first metatarsophalangeal joint (MTPJ) arthrodesis.
We performed a retrospective analysis of first MTPJ fusion using Bold® and Acutrak® compression screws, universal 1/3 tubular plate and Hallu®-S non-locking plate in 6 hospitals in Dublin over 4 years. A cohort of 300 patients (351 feet) was operated on by 3 feet and ankle fellowship trained orthopaedic surgeons (PK, MMS, JVMcK) over 4 years. Mean age was 62.4 years. There were 261 females and 39 males. One hundred three patients had a fusion of first MTPJ using two Acutrak® screws and 90 with two Bold® screws. Sixty-five were fused with the Hallu-S® plate and 42 with the universal 1/3 tubular plate. Patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically at 6 weeks, 3 months and 12 months.
Functional outcome scores performed using Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ). Failure rate in those fused with the Hallu®-S plate was 0%, Acutrak® screws 2.4%, Bold® screws 9.5% and universal 1/3 tubular plate 12.5% (p > 0.12). All treatment groups demonstrated significantly reduced MOXFQ scores (p value < 0.05).
In this retrospective study for first MTPJ fusion, a low profile, pre-contoured plate in combination with a screw mode had the best results with no failure rates and improved MOXFQ scores.
Level of clinical evidence: IV, retrospective study.
KeywordsFusion Metatarsophalangeal joint Osteoarthritis
Compliance with ethical standards
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional review board and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. This is a retrospective study formal consent is not required.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 1.Hueter C (1877) Klinik der Gelenkkrankheiten mit Einschlus der Orthopa .die. Vol 2. Verlag Von F. C. W. Vogel, Leipzig, p 10–1Google Scholar
- 2.Mann RA, Coughlin MJ (1981) Hallux valgus—etiology, anatomy, treatment and surgical considerations. Clin Orthop Relat Res 157:31–41Google Scholar
- 3.Broca P (1852) Deformities of the anterior foot caused by various types of shoes. Bull Soc Anat 27:60–67Google Scholar
- 4.Clutton HH (1894) The treatment of hallux valgus. St Thomas Hosp Rep 22:1–12Google Scholar
- 7.Kim PJ, Hatch D, Didomenico LA, Lee MS, Kaczander B, Count G et al (2012) A multicenter retrospective review of outcomes for arthrodesis, hemi-metallic joint implant, and resectional arthroplasty in the surgical treatment of end-stage hallux rigidus. J Foot Ankle Surg 51(1):50–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Rochwerger A, Curvale G, Sbihi A, Pinelli P-O, Groulier P (2001) Non-fusion des arthrodeses metatarso-phalangiennes du gros orteil: influence du type d'avivement. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 87(6, Supp):34Google Scholar
- 30.Storts EC, Camasta CA (2016) Immediate weightbearing of first metatarsophalangeal joint fusion comparing buried crossed Kirschner wires versus crossing screws: does incorporating the sesamoids into the fusion contribute to higher incidence of bony union. J Foot Ankle Surg 55(3):562–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar