Comparison of outcomes of different osteotomy sites for hallux valgus: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Jun-Ichi Fukushi, Hirofumi Tanaka, Takayuki Nishiyama, Makoto Hirao, Makoto Kubota, Masataka Kakihana, Daisuke Nozawa, Kota Watanabe, Ryuzo Okuda
{"title":"Comparison of outcomes of different osteotomy sites for hallux valgus: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Jun-Ichi Fukushi,&nbsp;Hirofumi Tanaka,&nbsp;Takayuki Nishiyama,&nbsp;Makoto Hirao,&nbsp;Makoto Kubota,&nbsp;Masataka Kakihana,&nbsp;Daisuke Nozawa,&nbsp;Kota Watanabe,&nbsp;Ryuzo Okuda","doi":"10.1177/10225536221110473","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Hallux valgus (HV) is a common foot deformity for which several corrective surgical procedures, with different osteotomy sites, have been reported. The purpose of the present study was to systematically review randomized (RCTs) or controlled (CCTs) clinical trials and perform meta-analysis on outcomes of different osteotomy sites of the first metatarsal.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An extensive literature search was conducted in PubMed and the Cochrane Library from January 1983 to July 2020. Studies were identified using the terms \"hallux valgus\" and \"osteotomy\". We included RCTs or CCTs comparing different locations of osteotomy for the first metatarsal bone (distal vs. mid-shaft, distal vs. proximal, and mid-shaft vs. proximal). The surgical outcomes included postoperative hallux valgus angle (HVA), intermetatarsal angle (IMA), American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, pain visual analog scale (VAS) score, perioperative complications and recurrence of deformity. We enrolled 10 studies with a total of 793 feet in the qualitative synthesis following full-text screening.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A majority of patients included in the enrolled trials showed mild to moderate deformity, with mean HVA <40°. Out of the 10 enrolled studies; six compared distal osteotomies with mid-shaft osteotomies and showed no significant differences in the surgical outcomes between the scarf and chevron groups; three RCTs compared distal osteotomies with proximal osteotomies with conflicting results, one RCT showed the superiority of proximal osteotomy while the other two RCTs showed equivalent outcomes; one study that compared between mid-shaft and proximal osteotomies showed equivalent outcomes between the groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For the management of mild to moderate HV deformity, we found no significant clinical and radiological differences between patients treated with scarf and chevron osteotomies. Further controlled trials comparing different sites of osteotomies for moderate to severe HV deformity are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":520682,"journal":{"name":"Journal of orthopaedic surgery (Hong Kong)","volume":" ","pages":"10225536221110473"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of orthopaedic surgery (Hong Kong)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10225536221110473","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Background: Hallux valgus (HV) is a common foot deformity for which several corrective surgical procedures, with different osteotomy sites, have been reported. The purpose of the present study was to systematically review randomized (RCTs) or controlled (CCTs) clinical trials and perform meta-analysis on outcomes of different osteotomy sites of the first metatarsal.

Methods: An extensive literature search was conducted in PubMed and the Cochrane Library from January 1983 to July 2020. Studies were identified using the terms "hallux valgus" and "osteotomy". We included RCTs or CCTs comparing different locations of osteotomy for the first metatarsal bone (distal vs. mid-shaft, distal vs. proximal, and mid-shaft vs. proximal). The surgical outcomes included postoperative hallux valgus angle (HVA), intermetatarsal angle (IMA), American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, pain visual analog scale (VAS) score, perioperative complications and recurrence of deformity. We enrolled 10 studies with a total of 793 feet in the qualitative synthesis following full-text screening.

Results: A majority of patients included in the enrolled trials showed mild to moderate deformity, with mean HVA <40°. Out of the 10 enrolled studies; six compared distal osteotomies with mid-shaft osteotomies and showed no significant differences in the surgical outcomes between the scarf and chevron groups; three RCTs compared distal osteotomies with proximal osteotomies with conflicting results, one RCT showed the superiority of proximal osteotomy while the other two RCTs showed equivalent outcomes; one study that compared between mid-shaft and proximal osteotomies showed equivalent outcomes between the groups.

Conclusion: For the management of mild to moderate HV deformity, we found no significant clinical and radiological differences between patients treated with scarf and chevron osteotomies. Further controlled trials comparing different sites of osteotomies for moderate to severe HV deformity are needed.

不同截骨部位治疗拇外翻的疗效比较:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:拇外翻(HV)是一种常见的足部畸形,已经报道了几种不同截骨部位的矫正外科手术。本研究的目的是系统地回顾随机(rct)或对照(CCTs)临床试验,并对第一跖骨不同截骨部位的结果进行荟萃分析。方法:1983年1月至2020年7月在PubMed和Cochrane图书馆进行了广泛的文献检索。研究使用术语“拇外翻”和“截骨”进行鉴定。我们纳入了比较第一跖骨不同截骨位置的随机对照试验或随机对照试验(远端与中轴、远端与近端、中轴与近端)。手术结果包括术后拇外翻角(HVA)、跖间角(IMA)、美国骨科足踝学会(AOFAS)评分、疼痛视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分、围手术期并发症及畸形复发情况。我们在全文筛选后的定性综合中纳入了10项研究,共793英尺。结果:纳入试验的大多数患者表现为轻度至中度畸形,平均HVA。结论:对于轻度至中度HV畸形的治疗,我们发现围巾截骨术和弓形截骨术在临床和影像学上没有显著差异。需要进一步的对照试验来比较不同部位的截骨术治疗中度至重度HV畸形。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信