Decreased Peritalar Subluxation in Progressive Collapsing Foot Deformity with Ankle Valgus Tilting.

IF 2.3 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS JBJS Open Access Pub Date : 2023-10-27 eCollection Date: 2023-10-01 DOI:10.2106/JBJS.OA.23.00025
Nacime Salomao Barbachan Mansur, Matthieu Lalevee, Alan Shamrock, Francois Lintz, Kepler Alencar Mendes de Carvalho, Cesar de Cesar Netto
{"title":"Decreased Peritalar Subluxation in Progressive Collapsing Foot Deformity with Ankle Valgus Tilting.","authors":"Nacime Salomao Barbachan Mansur,&nbsp;Matthieu Lalevee,&nbsp;Alan Shamrock,&nbsp;Francois Lintz,&nbsp;Kepler Alencar Mendes de Carvalho,&nbsp;Cesar de Cesar Netto","doi":"10.2106/JBJS.OA.23.00025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Middle facet subluxation (MFS) has been established as an early indicator of peritalar subluxation. However, when progressive collapsing foot deformity (PCFD) affects the ankle leading to a valgus talar tilt (Class E), structures and anatomic relationships distal to the ankle joint may be affected. Therefore, this study aimed to assess radiographic parameters of peritalar subluxation in patients with PCFD who either did or did not have a valgus ankle. Our hypothesis was that these parameters would differ in Class E patients, upsetting their capability to quantify deformity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a prospective comparative study utilizing weight-bearing computed tomography (WBCT) images of 21 feet with PCFD and with valgus of the ankle and 64 with flexible PCFD without ankle involvement. Parameters including MFS, the medial cuneiform-to-floor distance, the forefoot arch angle, the talonavicular coverage angle, the hindfoot moment arm (HMA), the foot-ankle offset (FAO), and the talar tilt angle (TTA) were measured and compared. Variables that influence the presence of ankle valgus and overall alignment were assessed by multivariable regression models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients with PCFD and ankle valgus demonstrated a higher mean HMA (20.79 mm [95% confidence interval (CI), 17.56 to 24.02 mm] versus 8.94 mm [95% CI, 7.09 to 10.79 mm]), FAO (14.89% [95% CI, 12.51% to 17.26%] versus 6.32% [95% CI, 4.96% to 7.68%]) and TTA (95% CI, 17.10° [14.75° to 19.46°] versus 2.30° [95% CI, 0.94° to 3.65°]) and lower mean MFS (21.84% [95% CI, 15.04% to 28.63%] versus 38.45% [95% CI, 34.55% to 42.34%]) compared with the group without ankle valgus (p < 0.0001 for all). The FAO was influenced by MFS in the group without ankle valgus (p <0.0001) but not in the group with ankle valgus (p = 0.9161). FAO values of ≥12.14% were a strong predictor (79.2%) of ankle valgus deformity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Subluxation of the middle facet was not as severe and did not influence the overall alignment in patients with PCFD who had valgus of the ankle (Class E). These findings suggest a distal peritalar reduction in the presence of a proximal deformity, making MFS an imprecise disease parameter in this scenario. An FAO value of ≥12.14% was a strong indicator of ankle deformity in patients with PCFD.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Diagnostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":36492,"journal":{"name":"JBJS Open Access","volume":"8 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10602506/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBJS Open Access","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.OA.23.00025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Middle facet subluxation (MFS) has been established as an early indicator of peritalar subluxation. However, when progressive collapsing foot deformity (PCFD) affects the ankle leading to a valgus talar tilt (Class E), structures and anatomic relationships distal to the ankle joint may be affected. Therefore, this study aimed to assess radiographic parameters of peritalar subluxation in patients with PCFD who either did or did not have a valgus ankle. Our hypothesis was that these parameters would differ in Class E patients, upsetting their capability to quantify deformity.

Methods: We performed a prospective comparative study utilizing weight-bearing computed tomography (WBCT) images of 21 feet with PCFD and with valgus of the ankle and 64 with flexible PCFD without ankle involvement. Parameters including MFS, the medial cuneiform-to-floor distance, the forefoot arch angle, the talonavicular coverage angle, the hindfoot moment arm (HMA), the foot-ankle offset (FAO), and the talar tilt angle (TTA) were measured and compared. Variables that influence the presence of ankle valgus and overall alignment were assessed by multivariable regression models.

Results: Patients with PCFD and ankle valgus demonstrated a higher mean HMA (20.79 mm [95% confidence interval (CI), 17.56 to 24.02 mm] versus 8.94 mm [95% CI, 7.09 to 10.79 mm]), FAO (14.89% [95% CI, 12.51% to 17.26%] versus 6.32% [95% CI, 4.96% to 7.68%]) and TTA (95% CI, 17.10° [14.75° to 19.46°] versus 2.30° [95% CI, 0.94° to 3.65°]) and lower mean MFS (21.84% [95% CI, 15.04% to 28.63%] versus 38.45% [95% CI, 34.55% to 42.34%]) compared with the group without ankle valgus (p < 0.0001 for all). The FAO was influenced by MFS in the group without ankle valgus (p <0.0001) but not in the group with ankle valgus (p = 0.9161). FAO values of ≥12.14% were a strong predictor (79.2%) of ankle valgus deformity.

Conclusions: Subluxation of the middle facet was not as severe and did not influence the overall alignment in patients with PCFD who had valgus of the ankle (Class E). These findings suggest a distal peritalar reduction in the presence of a proximal deformity, making MFS an imprecise disease parameter in this scenario. An FAO value of ≥12.14% was a strong indicator of ankle deformity in patients with PCFD.

Level of evidence: Diagnostic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
踝外翻倾合并进行性塌陷性足畸形的距骨周半脱位减少。
背景:中突半脱位(MFS)已被确定为翼周半脱位的早期指标。然而,当进行性足塌陷畸形(PCFD)影响脚踝导致距骨外翻(E级)时,踝关节远端的结构和解剖关系可能会受到影响。因此,本研究旨在评估有或没有踝外翻的PCFD患者的翼周半脱位的放射学参数。我们的假设是,这些参数在E类患者中会有所不同,从而破坏了他们量化畸形的能力。方法:我们利用负重计算机断层扫描(WBCT)图像对21只患有PCFD和踝外翻的脚和64只没有踝关节受累的柔性PCFD的脚进行了前瞻性比较研究。测量并比较了MFS、内侧楔形肌到地板的距离、前掌足弓角、距舟骨覆盖角、后脚力臂(HMA)、脚踝偏移(FAO)和距骨倾角(TTA)等参数。通过多变量回归模型评估影响踝外翻和整体对齐的变量。结果:PCFD和踝外翻患者的平均HMA较高(20.79毫米[95%置信区间,17.56至24.02毫米],而8.94毫米[95%可信区间,7.09至10.79毫米]),FAO(14.89%[95%CI,12.51%-17.26%]对6.32%[95%CI;4.96%-7.68%])和TTA(95%CI,17.10°[14.75°-19.46°]对2.30°[95%CI。在没有踝关节外翻的组中,FAO受到MFS的影响(p结论:在患有踝关节外翻(E级)的PCFD患者中,中小面半脱位没有那么严重,并且不会影响整体对齐。这些发现表明,在存在近端畸形的情况下,远端翼周缩小,使MFS在这种情况下成为一个不精确的疾病参数。FAO值≥12.14%是PCFD患者踝关节畸形的有力指标。证据级别:诊断级别II。有关证据级别的完整描述,请参阅《作者须知》。
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 去求助
来源期刊
JBJS Open Access
JBJS Open Access Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
77
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Both-Bone Forearm Shaft Fractures Treated with Compression Plate Fixation in Adults: A Systematic Review on Adverse Events and Outcomes. Exploring the Performance of ChatGPT in an Orthopaedic Setting and Its Potential Use as an Educational Tool. Nonoperative Care Versus Surgery for Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: An Application of a Health Economic Technique to Simulate Head-to-Head Comparisons. Collagenase Clostridium histolyticum Versus Needle Fasciotomy for Primary Metacarpophalangeal Dupuytren Contracture: Five-Year Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial. Reoperation Rate After Posterior Spinal Fusion Varies Significantly by Lenke Type.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1