ABDULLAH MERİÇ ÜNAL, Aydın BUDEYRİ, Bahattin BAYKAL

Comparison of contact surface areas of metatarsal diaphyseal osteotomies for correction of hallux valgus: Experimental study

Objective: This study aimed to determine, pre-correction, the potential change in the osteotomy-site bony contact surface areathat would occur during standard metatarsal diaphyseal procedures with the Baran-Unal modification of Mau osteotomy andthen to compare it, post-correction, with the actual osteotomy-site bony contact surface area changes for a standard degree ofdeformity correction.Methods: A total of 30 standard, same sized, biomechanically equivalent, left first metatarsal sawbones were included in this experimental study. They were divided equally into five groups for each of the planned osteotomy techniques: Myerson’s modification of Ludloff, Mau, scarf, Offset V, and Baran–Unal modification of Mau osteotomy. The normal osteotomy for each samplewas considered as the control, while the corrective osteotomy was the test. Computerized tomography scans and three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction imaging were performed for objective and accurate measurements. The techniques of the osteotomyand post-corrective osteotomy bony contact surface areas were investigated by the two independent research assistants.Results: There was a statistically significant difference between the contact surface area changes of all pre- and post-correctiveosteotomy groups (P

___

1. Johnson AE, Georgopoulos G, Erickson MA, Eilert R. Treatment of adolescent hallux valgus with the first metatarsal double osteotomy: The Denver experience. J Pediatr Orthop 2004; 24: 358-62. [Crossref]

2. Peterson HA, Newman SR. Adolescent bunion deformity treated with double osteotomy and longitudinal pin fixation of the first ray. J Pediatr Orthop 1993; 13: 80-4. [Crossref]

3. Robinson AH, Limbers JP. Modern concepts in the treatment of hallux valgus. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005; 87: 1038-45. [Crossref]

4. Rockett MS, Goss LR. Midshaft first-ray osteotomies for hallux valgus. Clin Podiatr Med Surg 2005; 22: 169-95. [Crossref]

5. Ludloff K. Die beseitigung des hallux valgus durch die schrage planta-dorsale osteotomie des metatarsus. Langenbecks Arch Klin Chir Ver Dtsch Z Chir 1918; 110: 364-87.

6. Mau C, Lauber H. Die operative Behandlung des hallux Valgus. Deutsche Zeit Orthop 1926; 197: 361-77. [Crossref]

7. Coetzee JC, Rippstein P. Surgical strategies: scarf osteotomy for hallux valgus. Foot Ankle Int 2007; 28: 529-35. [Crossref]

8. Vogler HW. The “off-set V” osteotomy in hallux valgus reduction. In: Six schools of surgical thought (syllabus). Cleveland: Ohio College of Podiatric Medicine, 1985.

9. Bae SY, Schon LC. Surgical strategies: Ludloff first metatarsal osteotomy. Foot Ankle Int 2007; 28: 137-44. [Crossref]

10. Coetzee JC. Scarf osteotomy for hallux valgus repair: the dark side. Foot Ankle Int 2003; 24: 29-33. [Crossref]

11. Sammarco VJ. Surgical strategies: Mau osteotomy for correction of moderate and severe hallux valgus deformity. Foot Ankle Int 2007; 28: 857-64. [Crossref]

12. Sanhudo JA. Correction of moderate to severe hallux valgus deformity by a modified chevron shaft osteotomy. Foot Ankle Int 2006; 27: 581-5. [Crossref]

13. Sanhudo JA. Extending the indications for distal chevron osteotomy. Foot Ankle Int 2000; 21: 522-3. [Crossref]

14. Unal AM, Baran O, Uzun B, Turan AC. Comparison of screw-fixation stabilities of first metatarsal shaft osteotomies: A biomechanical study. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2010; 44: 70-5. [Crossref]

15. Easley ME, Trnka HJ. Current concepts review: hallux valgus part 1: Pathomechanics, clinical assessment, and nonoperative management. Foot Ankle Int 2007; 28: 654-59. [Crossref]

16. Favre P, Farine M, Snedeker JG, Maquieira GJ, Espinosa N. Biomechanical consequences of first metatarsal osteotomy in treating hallux valgus. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2010; 25: 721-7. [Crossref]

17. Vienne P, Favre P, Meyer D, Schoeniger R, Wirth S, Espinosa N. Comparative mechanical testing of different geometric designs of distal first metatarsal osteotomies. Foot Ankle Int 2007; 28: 232-6. [Crossref]

18. Helmy N, Vienne P, Von Campe A, Espinosa N. Treatment of hallux valgus deformity: Preliminary results with a modified distal metatarsal osteotomy. Acta Orthop Belg 2009; 75: 661- 70.

19. Acevedo JI, Sammarco VJ, Boucher HR, Parks BG, Schon LC, Myerson MS. Mechanical comparison of cyclic loading in five different first metatarsal shaft osteotomies. Foot Ankle Int 2002; 23: 711-6. [Crossref]

20. Nyska M, Trnka HJ, Parks BG, Myerson MS. Proximal metatarsal osteotomies: a comparative geometric analysis conducted on sawbone models. Foot Ankle Int 2002; 23: 938-45. [Crossref]

21. Popoff I, Negrine JP, Zecovic M, Svehla M, Walsh WR. The effect of screw type on the biomechanical properties of SCARF and crescentic osteotomies of the first metatarsal. J Foot Ankle Surg 2003; 42: 161-4. [Crossref]

22. Trnka HJ, Parks BG, Ivanic G, et al. Six first metatarsal shaft osteotomies: mechanical and immobilization comparisons. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2000; 381: 256-65. [Crossref]

23. McCluskey LC, Johnson JE, Wynarsky GT, Harris GF. Comparison of stability of proximal crescentic metatarsal osteotomy and proximal horizontal “V” osteotomy. Foot Ankle Int 1994; 15: 263-70. [Crossref]

24. Shaw N, Wertheimer S, Krueger J, Haut R. A mechanical comparison of first metatarsal diaphyseal osteotomies for the correction of hallux abducto valgus. J Foot Ankle Surg 2001; 40: 271-6. [Crossref]