Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 42115045

K-wire versus screw fixation in Scarf-Akin osteotomy for hallux valgus: A retrospective cohort study.

Yutian Qiu·Boming Zhao·Mohamed Lamin Bangura·Manhua Huang·Awan Nasir Ikram·Chao Meng·Yongli Jin
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Retention of metal implants after Scarf-Akin osteotomy (SAO) may cause irritation and psychological discomfort, often necessitating a hardware removal procedure. This study aimed to introduce K-wire fixation, allowing for outpatient removal, and to compare it with screw fixation. METHODS: This retrospective study included 64 patients with hallux valgus, comprising 32 in the K-wire fixation group and 32 in the screw fixation group. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, visual analogue scale (VAS), and patient satisfaction. Radiographic parameters included hallux valgus angle(HVA), intermetatarsal angle(IMA), and distal metatarsal articular angle(DMAA). RESULTS: Both groups showed significant clinical and radiographic improvement (P&#x202f;<&#x202f;0.01). No significant between-group differences were observed in the other clinical or radiographic outcomes (P&#x202f;>&#x202f;0.05). Treatment costs were significantly lower in the K-wire group (P&#x202f;<&#x202f;0.001). CONCLUSIONS: K-wire fixation provides clinical and radiographic outcomes comparable to screw fixation, while avoiding the need for an additional procedure to remove the implant. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Explore related subjects

HumansHallux ValgusBone ScrewsRetrospective StudiesOsteotomyBone WiresFemaleMaleMiddle AgedHardware RemovalAdultTreatment OutcomeRadiographyPatient SatisfactionAgedFixation methodHallux valgusKirschner wireScarf-Akin osteotomyScrewJournal ArticleComparative Study

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Yutian Qiu, Boming Zhao, Mohamed Lamin Bangura, Manhua Huang, Awan Nasir Ikram, Chao Meng, Yongli Jin. 2026-05-08. K-wire versus screw fixation in Scarf-Akin osteotomy for hallux valgus: A retrospective cohort study.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fas.2026.05.001

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Journal Article; Comparative Study resourceAdult subjectAged subjectComparative Study subjectFemale subjectHumans subjectJournal Article subjectMale subjectMiddle Aged subjectPatient Satisfaction subject

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2026

Early radiographic loss of intermetatarsal angle correction after single first TMT arthrodesis (Modified Lapidus) versus three-corner TMT arthrodesis.

INTRODUCTION: The Lapidus procedure treats hallux valgus with first-ray hypermobility. It can be performed as a single first tarsometatarsal (TMT) arthrodesis or a three-corner TMT construct with additional intermetatarsal fusion. Early loss of correction remains a concern. This study compared early radiographic stability between techniques. METHODS: Fifty patients (15 three-corner TMT arthrodesis, 35 single first TMT arthrodesis) treated between 2014 and 2023 were retrospectively reviewed. Hallux valgus angle (HVA), intermetatarsal angle (IMA), M&#xe9;ary's angle, and tibial sesamoid position were measured on weight-bearing radiographs at 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Both techniques achieved significant correction. The three-corner TMT arthrodesis group showed greater initial IMA correction at 6 weeks (p&#x202f;=&#x202f;0.020) and maintained a lower IMA at 6 months (p&#x202f;=&#x202f;0.001). Early IMA loss was greater after single first TMT arthrodesis (1.5&#xb0;&#xb1;1.7&#xb0; vs 0.6&#xb0;&#xb1;0.8&#xb0;, p&#x202f;=&#x202f;0.013). CONCLUSION: Three-corner TMT arthrodesis was associated with greater early intermetatarsal stability than single first TMT arthrodesis.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Comparison of short-term clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction between intraoral scanning and conventional impressions for complete-arch implant prostheses: a pilot RCT.

OBJECTIVE: To compare framework passive fit, subjective evaluations, and short-term clinical outcomes between conventional impressions (CI) and intraoral scanning (IOS) for complete-arch implant-supported fixed dental prostheses (CIFDPs). METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, 22 patients were allocated to the CI or IOS groups. All participants received a definitive one-piece CIFDP. The primary outcome was framework passive fit, assessed using the Vision and Tactile Score (V&T score), which included framework lift-off, the single-screw test, the full-screw test, smoothness of screw insertion, and radiographic gap assessment. Secondary outcomes included operator evaluation, patient satisfaction using a visual analog scale (VAS), early implant survival, marginal bone loss (MBL), modified Plaque Index (mPII), and complications at the 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were enrolled (CI: n = 11; IOS: n = 11), and one patient in the CI group was lost to follow-up. No statistically significant difference in the V&T score was observed between the CI and IOS groups (4.66 &#xb1; 0.17 vs. 4.65 &#xb1; 0.28; P = 0.93). The operator reported greater nervousness during the CI procedure than during IOS (21.82 &#xb1; 15.69 vs. 8.64 &#xb1; 7.47; P < 0.05). Patients in the CI group reported significantly greater discomfort, including nausea and anxiety, than those in the IOS group (P < 0.05). At the 6-month follow-up, the early implant survival rate was 100% in both groups. No significant differences were found between the groups in MBL (0.09 &#xb1; 0.09 vs. 0.06 &#xb1; 0.10 mm; P = 0.43) or mPII (0.10 &#xb1; 0.12 vs. 0.10 &#xb1; 0.28; P = 0.99). CONCLUSION: IOS and CI achieved comparable short-term clinical outcomes in patients who met the predefined inclusion criteria, including controlled implant number, spacing, and angulation. IOS provided a more favorable experience for both operators and patients. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: In complete-arch implant restorations, intraoral scanning may provide clinical outcomes comparable to those of conventional impressions while improving patient comfort.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

The knee-ankle link: impact of knee varus severity on distal joint malalignment and concomitant pathologies.

BACKGROUND: Knee varus deformity is traditionally managed as an isolated joint pathology; however, persistent distal symptoms following proximal realignment suggest a more extensive kinetic chain dysfunction. The degree to which knee varus severity dictates distal malalignment and secondary pathologies remains poorly quantified in the current literature. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines (PROSPERO: CRD420261363327). A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library was performed from inception to April 2026. Studies examining the relationship between knee varus (HKA angle) and radiographic distal alignment or pathologies were included. Data synthesis utilized random-effects models, with prevalence analyzed via generalized linear mixed models (GLMM). RESULTS: Fourteen studies were included in the final synthesis. While pooling of continuous radiographic parameters was limited by high statistical heterogeneity in Talar Tilt (I2&#xa0;=&#xa0;96.5%), individual large-cohort data (Huang et al.) indicated that severe knee varus (HKA&#xa0;>&#xa0;10&#xb0;) was associated with increased odds of concomitant ankle osteoarthritis (OR 2.29; 95% CI 1.28-4.11) and a specific cohort prevalence of 37.1%. Furthermore, single-arm prevalence data revealed divergent trends across different study populations, with compensatory hindfoot valgus reaching 69.9% in some cohorts and rigid varus up to 63.9% in others. CONCLUSIONS: Severe genu varum is associated with distal kinetic chain alterations and concomitant ankle pathologies. However, due to the extreme heterogeneity and divergent distal adaptations observed across different cohorts, standardized knee-centric protocols may be insufficient. Further longitudinal and interventional studies are required to establish phenotype-specific rehabilitation guidelines.

Humans↗