[小切口微创关节外截骨治疗拇外翻后前足宽度变化的比较研究]。

Yang Zhang, Yanrong Yuan, Dehai Kong, Ying Liu, Guangchao Sun
{"title":"[小切口微创关节外截骨治疗拇外翻后前足宽度变化的比较研究]。","authors":"Yang Zhang, Yanrong Yuan, Dehai Kong, Ying Liu, Guangchao Sun","doi":"10.7507/1002-1892.202411013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the difference in forefoot width between minimally invasive extra-articular osteotomy via small incision and traditional Chevron osteotomy in the treatment of hallux valgus.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 45 patients with hallux valgus between April 2019 and July 2022. Among them, 22 cases underwent minimally invasive extra-articular osteotomy via small incision (minimally invasive group), and 23 cases underwent traditional Chevron osteotomy (traditional group). There was no significant difference in the baseline data between the two groups ( <i>P</i>>0.05), including gender, age, affected side, Mann classification of hallux valgus, disease duration, and preoperative intermetatarsal angle (IMA), hallux valgus angle (HVA), distal metatarsal articular angle (DMAA), bony forefoot width, soft tissue forefoot width, osteophyte width, and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score. The osteotomy healing time and the occurrence of complications in the two groups were recorded. The differences between pre- and post-operation (changes) in various imaging indicators and AOFAS scores in the two groups were calculated. And the bony forefoot width and soft tissue forefoot width at 1, 6, and 12 months after operation were also recorded and compared between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One case of skin injury occurred during operation in the minimally invasive group, while 3 cases of poor wound healing occurred after operation in the traditional group. None of the patients experienced infections, nerve injuries, or other complications. All patients were followed up 12-31 months (mean, 22.5 months). The osteotomy healed in the two groups and no significant difference in healing time between the two groups was found ( <i>P</i>>0.05). The IMA, HVA, DMAA, osteophyte width, and AOFAS score at 12 months after operation significantly improved compared to those before operation ( <i>P</i><0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the changes of IMA, HVA, and osteophyte width ( <i>P</i>>0.05). However, the differences in the changes of AOFAS score and DMAA were significant ( <i>P</i><0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in bony and soft tissue forefoot widths at different time points after operation ( <i>P</i>>0.05). However, there were significant differences in the two groups between the pre- and post-operation ( <i>P</i><0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The minimally invasive extra-articular osteotomy via small incision for hallux valgus, despite not removing the medial osteophyte of the first metatarsal, can still effectively improve the forefoot width and osteophyte width. While correcting the IMA and HVA, it can more effectively restore the DMAA, resulting in better AOFAS scores.</p>","PeriodicalId":23979,"journal":{"name":"中国修复重建外科杂志","volume":"39 2","pages":"140-145"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11839303/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Comparative study on changes in forefoot width after minimally invasive extra-articular osteotomy via small incision for hallux valgus].\",\"authors\":\"Yang Zhang, Yanrong Yuan, Dehai Kong, Ying Liu, Guangchao Sun\",\"doi\":\"10.7507/1002-1892.202411013\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the difference in forefoot width between minimally invasive extra-articular osteotomy via small incision and traditional Chevron osteotomy in the treatment of hallux valgus.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 45 patients with hallux valgus between April 2019 and July 2022. Among them, 22 cases underwent minimally invasive extra-articular osteotomy via small incision (minimally invasive group), and 23 cases underwent traditional Chevron osteotomy (traditional group). There was no significant difference in the baseline data between the two groups ( <i>P</i>>0.05), including gender, age, affected side, Mann classification of hallux valgus, disease duration, and preoperative intermetatarsal angle (IMA), hallux valgus angle (HVA), distal metatarsal articular angle (DMAA), bony forefoot width, soft tissue forefoot width, osteophyte width, and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score. The osteotomy healing time and the occurrence of complications in the two groups were recorded. The differences between pre- and post-operation (changes) in various imaging indicators and AOFAS scores in the two groups were calculated. And the bony forefoot width and soft tissue forefoot width at 1, 6, and 12 months after operation were also recorded and compared between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>One case of skin injury occurred during operation in the minimally invasive group, while 3 cases of poor wound healing occurred after operation in the traditional group. None of the patients experienced infections, nerve injuries, or other complications. All patients were followed up 12-31 months (mean, 22.5 months). The osteotomy healed in the two groups and no significant difference in healing time between the two groups was found ( <i>P</i>>0.05). The IMA, HVA, DMAA, osteophyte width, and AOFAS score at 12 months after operation significantly improved compared to those before operation ( <i>P</i><0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the changes of IMA, HVA, and osteophyte width ( <i>P</i>>0.05). However, the differences in the changes of AOFAS score and DMAA were significant ( <i>P</i><0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in bony and soft tissue forefoot widths at different time points after operation ( <i>P</i>>0.05). However, there were significant differences in the two groups between the pre- and post-operation ( <i>P</i><0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The minimally invasive extra-articular osteotomy via small incision for hallux valgus, despite not removing the medial osteophyte of the first metatarsal, can still effectively improve the forefoot width and osteophyte width. While correcting the IMA and HVA, it can more effectively restore the DMAA, resulting in better AOFAS scores.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23979,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"中国修复重建外科杂志\",\"volume\":\"39 2\",\"pages\":\"140-145\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11839303/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"中国修复重建外科杂志\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7507/1002-1892.202411013\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中国修复重建外科杂志","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7507/1002-1892.202411013","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较小切口微创关节外截骨术与传统Chevron截骨术治疗拇外翻前足宽度的差异。方法:回顾性分析2019年4月~ 2022年7月收治的45例拇外翻患者的临床资料。其中小切口微创关节外截骨术22例(微创组),传统Chevron截骨术23例(传统组)。两组患者的性别、年龄、患侧、拇外翻Mann分型、病程、术前跖间角(IMA)、拇外翻角(HVA)、跖远端关节角(DMAA)、骨性前足宽度、软组织前足宽度、骨癣宽度、美国骨科足踝学会(AOFAS)评分等基线资料比较,差异均无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。记录两组患者截骨愈合时间及并发症发生情况。计算两组患者术前、术后各项影像学指标及AOFAS评分的差异(变化)。记录两组患者术后1、6、12个月骨性前足宽度和软组织前足宽度,并进行比较。结果:微创组术中出现1例皮肤损伤,传统组术后出现3例创面愈合不良。没有患者出现感染、神经损伤或其他并发症。随访12-31个月(平均22.5个月)。两组截骨愈合,愈合时间比较差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。术后12个月IMA、HVA、DMAA、骨痂宽度、AOFAS评分较术前明显改善(p < 0.05)。AOFAS评分和DMAA的变化差异有统计学意义(p < 0.05)。结论:小切口微创关节外截骨术治疗拇外翻,虽未去除第一跖内侧骨赘,但仍能有效改善前足宽度和骨赘宽度。在纠正IMA和HVA的同时,可以更有效地恢复DMAA,从而获得更好的AOFAS评分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
[Comparative study on changes in forefoot width after minimally invasive extra-articular osteotomy via small incision for hallux valgus].

Objective: To compare the difference in forefoot width between minimally invasive extra-articular osteotomy via small incision and traditional Chevron osteotomy in the treatment of hallux valgus.

Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 45 patients with hallux valgus between April 2019 and July 2022. Among them, 22 cases underwent minimally invasive extra-articular osteotomy via small incision (minimally invasive group), and 23 cases underwent traditional Chevron osteotomy (traditional group). There was no significant difference in the baseline data between the two groups ( P>0.05), including gender, age, affected side, Mann classification of hallux valgus, disease duration, and preoperative intermetatarsal angle (IMA), hallux valgus angle (HVA), distal metatarsal articular angle (DMAA), bony forefoot width, soft tissue forefoot width, osteophyte width, and American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score. The osteotomy healing time and the occurrence of complications in the two groups were recorded. The differences between pre- and post-operation (changes) in various imaging indicators and AOFAS scores in the two groups were calculated. And the bony forefoot width and soft tissue forefoot width at 1, 6, and 12 months after operation were also recorded and compared between the two groups.

Results: One case of skin injury occurred during operation in the minimally invasive group, while 3 cases of poor wound healing occurred after operation in the traditional group. None of the patients experienced infections, nerve injuries, or other complications. All patients were followed up 12-31 months (mean, 22.5 months). The osteotomy healed in the two groups and no significant difference in healing time between the two groups was found ( P>0.05). The IMA, HVA, DMAA, osteophyte width, and AOFAS score at 12 months after operation significantly improved compared to those before operation ( P<0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the changes of IMA, HVA, and osteophyte width ( P>0.05). However, the differences in the changes of AOFAS score and DMAA were significant ( P<0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in bony and soft tissue forefoot widths at different time points after operation ( P>0.05). However, there were significant differences in the two groups between the pre- and post-operation ( P<0.05).

Conclusion: The minimally invasive extra-articular osteotomy via small incision for hallux valgus, despite not removing the medial osteophyte of the first metatarsal, can still effectively improve the forefoot width and osteophyte width. While correcting the IMA and HVA, it can more effectively restore the DMAA, resulting in better AOFAS scores.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
中国修复重建外科杂志
中国修复重建外科杂志 Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11334
期刊介绍:
期刊最新文献
[Impact of lamina formation range on lumbar biomechanics in unilateral biportal endoscopic spine surgery: a finite element analysis for surgical optimization]. [Differential analysis of gut microbiome in patients with periprosthetic joint infection, aseptic failure, and osteoarthritis]. [Clinical application research of three-dimensional printed patient-specific cutting guides in Cole midfoot osteotomy]. [Experimental investigation of skin tissue-derived extracellular vesicles isolated from type 2 diabetic foot ulcers in impaired wound healing]. [Interpretation of the Expert Consensus for Full Course Management of Plexiform Neurofibroma (2025 Edition)].
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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