Mobility of the First Tarsometatarsal Joint in Hallux Valgus Patients: A Radiographic Analysis

2001 ◽  
Vol 22 (12) ◽  
pp. 965-969 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank W.M. Faber ◽  
Gerrit-Jan Kleinrensink ◽  
Paul G.H. Mulder ◽  
Jan A.N. Verhaar
1995 ◽  
Vol 77 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-213 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y Tanaka ◽  
Y Takakura ◽  
T Kumai ◽  
N Samoto ◽  
S Tamai

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 2473011420S0035
Author(s):  
Daniel Miles ◽  
Tyler W. Fraser ◽  
Neal Huang ◽  
Franklin B. Davis ◽  
Jesse F. Doty

Category: Midfoot/Forefoot; Other Introduction/Purpose: Midfoot arthrodesis is a reliable procedure for deformity correction and pain relief. First tarsometatarsal arthrodesis can be used for correction of hallux valgus deformity with large intermetatarsal angles or first-ray hypermobility. Midfoot arthrodesis is also integral in correction of pes planovalgus deformity with midfoot collapse. First tarsometatarsal arthrodesis has a nonunion rate of 2-15%. Arthrodesis is completed traditionally through a dorsal approach. Due to high nonunion rates, recent studies have investigated plater based plates. These have been shown to have superior strength by creating a tension band construct as the foot is loaded. Tibialis anterior footprint is at risk when accessing first tarsometatarsal joint for arthrodesis. We explore whether the tibialis insertional footprint can be released and repaired with no deleterious effects. Methods: Patients included were undergoing first tarsometatarsal joint or naviculocuneiform joint arthrodesis with a plantar based plate and screw construct for hallux valgus deformity with large intermetatarsal angle or first-ray hypermobility, and those with first TMT joint arthritis, pes planovalgus, Lisfranc injury, or Charcot neuroarthropathy. Medial based surgical approach is centered over the first tarsometatarsal joint. Saphenous neurovascular bundle is retracted dorsally. Release of the capsular structures allowed for complete visualization and distraction of the joint. The distal-most attachment of the tibialis anterior tendon onto the first metatarsal is release in line with the capsulotomy. Primary insertion on the medial cuneiform was preserved. A cuff of released insertional tissue is preserved and reflected distally for repair. Standard tarsometatarsal arthrodesis joint preparation was completed. Plantar plate then fixed and compressed. Deep fascial layers were then closed over the plated were previous tendon release was performed. Results: In 62 patients, none had tibialis anterior tendon rupture, weakness, or irritation, with average follow-up of 36.2 months. Nine wound complications were recognized during the study. Twelve percent of patients experiencing delayed incisional healing that went on to heal with local wound care. Smokers accounted for six of the seven patients (OR 24.62, p<.05), and one of seven patients had Charcot (OR 2.08, p<.05). Deep wound complications, which required return to the operating room for formal irrigation and debridement, were seen in 3% (2 of 62). Both patients were active smokers and had removal of hardware at the time of debridement. Both underwent definitive coverage with split-thickness skin grafts and went on to successful arthrodesis and wound healing. Conclusion: One advantage of applying a plate and screw construct plantarly for midfoot arthrodesis is biomechanical stability. Multiple studies have indicated this plantar construct may be superior. Another benefit may be less hardware prominence due to increased soft-tissue coverage. Subcutaneous positions of dorsal plates have been reported to contribute to incisional irritation and symptomatic hardware. Tibialis anterior tendon damage has been suggested as a limitation of the plantar approach for midfoot arthrodesis, and the tendon insertion must be released to prepare the joint adequately to apply implants. This series shows tendon release can be safely accomplished without any deleterious effects. [Table: see text]


1995 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 139-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikiforos Pandelis Saragas ◽  
Petrus Johannes Becker

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 2473011419S0030
Author(s):  
Byung Jo Min ◽  
Seungbum Koo ◽  
Won-keun Park ◽  
Ki-bum Kwon ◽  
Kyoung Min Lee

Category: Midfoot/Forefoot Introduction/Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the pedobarographic characteristics of tarsometatarsal instability and to identify factors associated with pedobarographic first tarsometatarsal instability in patients with hallux valgus deformity. Methods: Fifty-seven patients (mean age, 59.7 years; standard deviation, 11.4 years; 6 men and 51 women) with a hallux valgus angle (HVA) greater than 15° were included. All patients underwent a pedobarographic examination along with weight-bearing anteroposterior (AP) and lateral foot radiography. Radiographic measurements were compared between the two groups with and without pedobarographic first tarsometatarsal instability. The association between the radiographic and pedobarographic parameters of the first tarsometatarsal instability was analyzed using the chi-square test. Binary logistic regression analysis was performed to identify significant factors affecting pedobarographic first tarsometatarsal instability. Results: HVA (p<0.001), the intermetatarsal angle (p=0.001), and AP talo-first metatarsal angle were significantly different between the pedobarographically stable and unstable tarsometatarsal groups. There was no significant association between radiographic and pedobarographic instabilities of the first tarsometatarsal joint (p=0.924). HVA was found to be the only significant factor affecting pedobarographic tarsometatarsal joint instability (p=0.001). Conclusion: The pedobarographic examination has possible clinical utility in evaluating first tarsometatarsal joint instability in patients with hallux valgus deformity. Patients with greater HVA need to be carefully monitored for the presence of first tarsometatarsal instability, and the necessity of the Lapidus procedure should be considered.


2008 ◽  
Vol 29 (10) ◽  
pp. 1025-1030 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasuhito Tanaka ◽  
Yoshinori Takakura ◽  
Tsukasa Kumai ◽  
Kazuya Sugimoto ◽  
Akira Taniguchi ◽  
...  

Background: A proximal spherical metatarsal osteotomy was devised to correct not only varus deviation of the first metatarsal, but also dorsiflexion. We expected to increase the medial longitudinal arch by adding plantar flexion at the osteotomy site. To investigate the limitations of this procedure for feet with severe hallux valgus, a followup study was performed on patients with preoperative hallux valgus angles greater than or equal to 40 degrees. Materials and Methods: Forty-eight feet in 37 patients (10 male, 27 female) (60 years; range, 20 to 84 years) were investigated. Mean followup was 4 years and 1 month, ranging from 2 to 8 years. The spherical osteotomy was performed using a curved chisel. A distal soft tissue procedure was done at the same time. Twenty feet received combined operations for their combined deformities. Results: While 81% of patients were satisfied with the results, 50% of those with preoperative hallux valgus angles greater than or equal to 50 degrees had postoperative hallux valgus angle greater than or equal to 20 degrees. In these patients, correction of metatarsus primus varus was good, but correction of valgus deviation of the hallux was fair. Mean correction toward plantar flexion was 1.5 degrees and no increase in arch height was achieved. Conclusion: The proximal spherical osteotomy could consistently achieve satisfactory results for the patients with hallux valgus angles less than 50 degrees. However, the corrections were worse in feet with more severe deformities. Furthermore, plantarflexion at the osteotomy site was offset by displacement at the first tarsometatarsal joint. If plantarflexion is indispensable, arthrodesis of the tarsometatarsal joint is recommended. Level of Evidence: IV, Retrospective Case Series


Author(s):  
Audrey Manceron ◽  
Cyrille Cazeau ◽  
Alexandre Hardy ◽  
Christophe Piat ◽  
Thomas Bauer ◽  
...  

TRAUMA ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 110-115
Author(s):  
D.V. Prozorovskiy ◽  
R.I. Buznytskiy ◽  
К.К. Romanenko ◽  
А.V. Ermovskiy

2001 ◽  
Vol 16 (8) ◽  
pp. 714-716 ◽  
Author(s):  
F.W.M. Faber ◽  
P.E. Zollinger ◽  
G.J. Kleinrensink ◽  
L. Damen ◽  
P.G.H. Mulder ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document