Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Percutaneous forefoot surgery for treatment of hallux valgus deformity: an intermediate prospective study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

This study aims to illustrate the results of percutaneous forefoot surgery (PFS) for correction of hallux valgus.

Materials and methods

A prospective study of 108 patients, with hallux valgus deformity, who underwent PFS was conducted. The minimum clinical and radiological follow-up was two years (mean 57.3 months, range 22–112).

Results

Preoperative mean visual analog scale was 6.3 ± 1.5 points, and AOFAS scores were 50.6 ± 11 points. At the last follow-up, both scores improved to 1.9 ± 2.4 points and 85.9 ± 1.83 points, respectively. Mean hallux valgus angle changed from 34.3° ± 9.3° preoperatively to 22.5° ± 11.1° at follow-up. At follow-up, 76.5% of the subjects were satisfied or very satisfied. Recurrence of medial 1st MT head pain happened in 22 cases (16.7%).

Conclusions

PFS, in our study, does not improve the radiological and patient satisfaction rate results compared with conventional procedures. The main advantage is a low postoperative pain level, but with an insufficient HVA correction.

Level of evidence

II, prospective study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. De Prado M, Ripio PL, Golano P (2003) Hallux valgus. In: Cirugía percutánea del antepie. Barcelona: Masson SA, pp 57–94

  2. Isham SA (1991) The Reverdin-Isham procedure for the correction of hallux abducto valgus. A distal metatarsal osteotomy procedure. Clin Podiatr Med Surg 8(1):81–94

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. De Lavigne C, de Prado M, Sugar G, Determe P (2007) Hallux valgus and forefoot surgery: mini-invasive or open? In: Symposium 41. 8th EFORT congress, May 13, 2007, Florence Italy. http://www.efort.org/_documents%5CJunior%20Reports%5C3.rapor.pdf. Accessed 10 Oct 2008

  4. Roukis TS (2009) Percutaneous and minimum incisión metatarsal osteotomies: a systematic review. J Foot Ankle Surg 48(3):380–387

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kitaoka HB, Alexander IJ, Adelaar RS, Nunley JA, Meyerson MS, Sanders M (1999) Clinical rating systems for the ankle-hindfoot, midfoot, hallux and lesser toes. Foot Ankle Int 15(7):349–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ibrahim T, Beiri A, Azzabi M, Best AJ, Taylos GJ, Menon DK (2007) Reliability and validity of the subjective component of the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society clinical rating scales. J Foot Ankle Surg 46(2):65–74

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Coughlin MJ, Saltzman CL, Nunley JAI (2002) Angular measurements in the evaluation of hallux valgus deformities: a report of the ad hoc committee of the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society on angular measurements. Foot Ankle Int 23:68–74

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Pigott H (1960) The natural history of hallux valgus in adolescent and early adult life. J Bone Joint Surg Am 42:749–760

    Google Scholar 

  9. Kadakia AR, Smerek JP, Myerson MS (2007) Radiographic results after percutaneous distal metatarsal osteotomy for correction of hallux valgus deformity. Foot Ankle Int 28:355–360

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Price DD, McGrath PA, Rafii A, Buckingham B (1983) The validation of visual analogue scales as ratio scale measures for chronic and experimental pain. Pain 17(1):45–56

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jensen MP, Karoly P, Braver S (1986) The measurement of clinical pain intensity: a comparison of six methods. Pain 27(1):117–126

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lee JS, Hobden E, Stiell IG, Wells GA (2003) Clinically important change in the visual analog scale after adequate pain control. Acad Emerg Med 10(10):1128–1130

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Nikolaou VS, Korres D, Xypnitos F, Lazarettos J, Lallos S, Sapkas G, Efstathopoulos N (2009) Fixation of Mitchell’s osteotomy with bioabsorbable pins for treatment of hallux valgus deformity. Int Orthop 33(3):701–706

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Deveci A, Firat A, Yilmaz S, Oken OF, Yildirim AO, Ucaner A, Bozkurt M (2013) Short-term clinical and radiologic results of the scarf osteotomy: what factors contribute to recurrence? J Foot Ankle Surg 52(6):771–775

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Aminian A, Kelikian A, Moen T (2006) Scarf osteotomy for hallux valgus deformity: an intermediate follow-up of clinical and radiographic outcomes. Foot Ankle Int 27:883–886

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lee KB, Cho NY, Park HW, Seon JK, Lee SH (2015) A comparison of proximal and distal Chevron osteotomy, both with lateral soft-tissue release, for moderate to severe hallux valgus in patients undergoing simultaneous bilateral correction. Bone Jt J 97B:202–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Schneider W, Aigner N, Pinggera O, Knahr K (2004) Chevron osteotomy in hallux valgus: ten-year results of 112 cases. J Bone Jt Surg Br 86:1016–1020

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Giannini S, Cavallo M, Faldini C, Luciani D, Vannini F (2013) The SERI distal metatarsal osteotomy and Scarf osteotomy provide similar correction of hallux valgus. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471:2305–2311

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Frelson M, Gayet LE, Bouche G, Hamcha H, Nebout J, Pries P (2005) Ostetomie Scarf dans le traitement de l’hallux valgus. A propos de 123 cas avec un recul moyen de 4,8 ans. Rev Chir Orthop 91:257–266

    Google Scholar 

  20. Crevoiser X, Mouhsine E, Ortolano V, Udin B, Dutoit M (2001) The Scarf osteotomy for the treatment of hallux valgus deformity: a review of 84 cases. Foot Ankle Int 22:970–976

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Bock P, Kluger R, Kirsten K, Mittlbock M, Schuh R, Trnka H (2015) The Scarf osteotomy with minimally invasive lateral release for treatment of hallux valgus deformity. J Bone Jt Surg Am 97:1238–1245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Fakoor M, Sarafan N, Mohammadhoseini P, Khorami M, Arti H, Mosavi S, Aghaeeaghdam A (2014) Comparison of clinical outcomes of Scarf and Chevron osteotomies and the McBride procedure in the treatment of hallux valgus deformity. Arch Bone Jt Surg 2(1):31–36

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Bauer T, Lavigne C, Biau D, De Prado M, Isham S, Laffenetre O (2009) Percutaneous hallux valgus surgery: a prospective multicenter study of 189 cases. Orthop Clin N Am 40:505–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bauer T, Biau D, Lortat-Jacob A, Ardí P (2010) Percutaneous hallux valgus correction using the Reverdin-Isham osteotomy. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 96(4):407–416

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lee KB, Hur CI, Chung JY, Juns ST (2009) Outcome of unilateral versus simultaneous correction for hallux valgus. Foot Ankle Int 30(2):120–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Jones S, Al Hussainy HA, Ali F, Betts RP, Flowers MJ (2004) Scarf osteotomy for hallux valgus. A prospective clinical and pedobarographic study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 86:830–836

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Bonnel F, Canovas F, Poiree G, Dusserre F, Vergnes C (1999) Èvaluation de l’ostéotomie Scarf pour hallux valgus en function de l’angle articulaire distal métarsien: etude prospective sur 79 cas operas. Rev Chir Orthop 85:381–386

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Easley ME, Trnka HJ (2007) Current concepts review: hallux valgus part II: operative treatment. Foot Ankle Int 28(6):748–758

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Trnka HJ, Zembsch A, Easeley ME, Salzer M, Ritschl P, Myerson MS (2000) The chevron osteotomy for correction of hallux valgus. Comparison of findings after two and five years of follow-up. J Bone Jt Surg Am 82:1373–1378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kilmartin TE, O’Kane C (2010) Combined rotation scarf and Akin osteotomies for hallux valgus: a patient focussed 9 year follow up for 50 patients. J Foot Ankle Res 3:2. doi:10.1186/1757-1146-3-2

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Okuda R, Kinoshita M, Yasuda T, Jotoku T, Shima H, Takamura M (2011) Hallux valgus angle as a predictor of recurrence following proximal metatarsal ostoeotomy. J Orthop Sci 16(6):760–764

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Lehman DE (2003) Salvage of complications of hallux valgus surgery. Foot Ankle Clin 8(1):15–35

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Robison AH, Limbers JP (2005) Modern concepts in the treatment of hallux valgus. J Bone Jt Surg Br 87(8):1038–1045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Torkki M, Seitsalo S, Paavolainen P (2001) Chevron osteotomy for correction of hallux valgus: a long-term follow-up study. Foot 11:91–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Raikin SM, Miller AG, Daniel J (2014) Recurrence of hallux valgus. A review. Foot Ankle Clin N Am 19:259–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. García-Fernández D, Gil-Garay E, Lora-Pablos D, De la Cruz Bértolo J, Llanos-Alcázar LF (2011) Comparative study of the Weil osteotomy with and without fixation. Foot Ankle Surg 17:103–107

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Henry J, Besse JL, Fessy AFCP (2011) Distal osteotomy of the lateral metatarsals: a series of 72 cases comparing the Weil osteotomy and the DMMO percutaneous osteotomy. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 97S:S57–S65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Bauer T (2014) Percutaneous forefoot surgery. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 100:S191–S204

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Thordason D, Ebramzadeh E, Moorthy M, Lee J, Rudicel S (2005) Correlation of hallux valgus surgical outcome with AOFAS forefoot score and radiological parameters. Foot Ankle Int 26(2):122–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Orthopaedic and Traumatology Unit, Hospital Mancha-Centro, Avenida de la Constitución s/n, Alcázar de San Juan, CP: 13600, Ciudad Real, Spain

    E. Crespo Romero, R. Peñuela Candel, S. Gómez Gómez, A. Arcas Ordoño, J. Gálvez González & R. Crespo Romero

  2. Research Support Unit, Hospital Mancha-Centro, Avenida de la Constitución s/n, Alcázar de San Juan, CP: 13600, Ciudad Real, Spain

    A. Arias Arias

Authors
  1. E. Crespo Romero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. Peñuela Candel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S. Gómez Gómez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. Arias Arias
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. A. Arcas Ordoño
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. J. Gálvez González
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. R. Crespo Romero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to E. Crespo Romero.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interests with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Human and animal rights statement

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Crespo Romero, E., Peñuela Candel, R., Gómez Gómez, S. et al. Percutaneous forefoot surgery for treatment of hallux valgus deformity: an intermediate prospective study. Musculoskelet Surg 101, 167–172 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-017-0464-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-017-0464-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation