Biomechanical Consequences of Proximal Screw Placement in Minimally Invasive Surgery for Hallux Valgus Correction

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q2 Medicine
{"title":"Biomechanical Consequences of Proximal Screw Placement in Minimally Invasive Surgery for Hallux Valgus Correction","authors":"","doi":"10.1053/j.jfas.2024.06.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Hallux valgus is one of the most common surgically corrected forefoot deformities. Studies evaluating clinical outcomes of minimally invasive chevron and akin (MICA) procedure have shown shorter operation time, faster recovery, and smaller scars compared to the open approach. Previous biomechanical cadaveric studies have largely focused on the open approach with minimal on MICA. To our knowledge, no studies have compared different proximal screw placements in MICA which can either be three-point fixation or intramedullary. This study aims to compare the biomechanical properties of fixation between these 2 techniques in MICA. Six matched pairs of human fresh frozen cadaveric feet were randomized to either 3-point fixation or intramedullary groups. Both procedures were performed by a single fellowship-trained orthopedic foot and ankle surgeon. Using a material testing machine, each specimen underwent 1000 cycles of plantar-to-dorsal uniaxial loads from 0 to 31 N in cantilever configuration while monitoring bending stiffness and distal fragment dorsal angulation. They were then subjected to load until failure at a compression rate of 10 mm/min. Specimens from both groups tolerated the walking fatigue test. Mean bending stiffness of 3-point fixation was 84% higher than intramedullary constructs (<em>p</em> = .002). Mean dorsal angulation of intramedullary was thrice that of 3-point fixation constructs (<em>p</em> = .008). Mean load to failure of 3-point fixation was 30% higher than intramedullary constructs (<em>p</em> = .001). Three-point fixation provide superior biomechanical stability compared to intramedullary proximal screw placement. The surgical technique using 3-point proximal screw fixation can offer robust fixation and lead to better clinical outcomes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":50191,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1067251624001406","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Hallux valgus is one of the most common surgically corrected forefoot deformities. Studies evaluating clinical outcomes of minimally invasive chevron and akin (MICA) procedure have shown shorter operation time, faster recovery, and smaller scars compared to the open approach. Previous biomechanical cadaveric studies have largely focused on the open approach with minimal on MICA. To our knowledge, no studies have compared different proximal screw placements in MICA which can either be three-point fixation or intramedullary. This study aims to compare the biomechanical properties of fixation between these 2 techniques in MICA. Six matched pairs of human fresh frozen cadaveric feet were randomized to either 3-point fixation or intramedullary groups. Both procedures were performed by a single fellowship-trained orthopedic foot and ankle surgeon. Using a material testing machine, each specimen underwent 1000 cycles of plantar-to-dorsal uniaxial loads from 0 to 31 N in cantilever configuration while monitoring bending stiffness and distal fragment dorsal angulation. They were then subjected to load until failure at a compression rate of 10 mm/min. Specimens from both groups tolerated the walking fatigue test. Mean bending stiffness of 3-point fixation was 84% higher than intramedullary constructs (p = .002). Mean dorsal angulation of intramedullary was thrice that of 3-point fixation constructs (p = .008). Mean load to failure of 3-point fixation was 30% higher than intramedullary constructs (p = .001). Three-point fixation provide superior biomechanical stability compared to intramedullary proximal screw placement. The surgical technique using 3-point proximal screw fixation can offer robust fixation and lead to better clinical outcomes.
微创手术矫正足外翻中近端螺钉置入的生物力学后果。
足外翻是最常见的前足畸形矫正手术之一。对微创切弗隆和阿金(MICA)手术的临床效果进行评估的研究表明,与开放式方法相比,微创切弗隆和阿金手术的手术时间更短、恢复更快、疤痕更小。以前的尸体生物力学研究主要集中在开放式方法上,对 MICA 的研究很少。据我们所知,还没有研究比较过 MICA 的不同近端螺钉位置,这些螺钉可以是三点固定,也可以是髓内固定。本研究旨在比较 MICA 中这两种固定技术的生物力学特性。六对匹配的人体新鲜冷冻尸体足被随机分为三点固定组和髓内固定组。两种手术均由一名受过研究培训的足踝矫形外科医生实施。使用材料试验机,每个样本在悬臂配置下承受了1000次从0到31 N的从足底到足背的单轴载荷循环,同时监测弯曲刚度和远端片段的足背角度。然后以 10 毫米/分钟的压缩率承受载荷直至失效。两组试样均能承受行走疲劳试验。三点固定的平均弯曲刚度比髓内结构高84%(P=0.002)。髓内结构的平均背侧角度是三点固定结构的三倍(P=0.008)。三点固定的平均失效载荷比髓内结构高出30%(P=0.001)。与髓内近端螺钉置入相比,三点固定具有更高的生物力学稳定性。使用三点式近端螺钉固定的手术技术可提供稳固的固定,并带来更好的临床疗效。临床证据级别:5。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery
Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery ORTHOPEDICS-SURGERY
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
234
审稿时长
29.8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery is the leading source for original, clinically-focused articles on the surgical and medical management of the foot and ankle. Each bi-monthly, peer-reviewed issue addresses relevant topics to the profession, such as: adult reconstruction of the forefoot; adult reconstruction of the hindfoot and ankle; diabetes; medicine/rheumatology; pediatrics; research; sports medicine; trauma; and tumors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信