SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Arthrodesis”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

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), Méary'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 = 0.020) and maintained a lower IMA at 6 months (p = 0.001). Early IMA loss was greater after single first TMT arthrodesis (1.5°±1.7° vs 0.6°±0.8°, p = 0.013). CONCLUSION: Three-corner TMT arthrodesis was associated with greater early intermetatarsal stability than single first TMT arthrodesis.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Contemporary surgical decision-making for hallux valgus and hallux rigidus in Switzerland: A national cross-sectional survey using standardized clinical scenarios.

BACKGROUND: Surgical management of hallux valgus and hallux rigidus is influenced by deformity severity, surgeon training, and evolving techniques. Previous surveys in Australia (2012), Switzerland (2015), and Israel (2023) using identical hypothetical cases demonstrated marked regional differences and a recent rise in minimally invasive Chevron-Akin (MICA). Whether these advances have altered contemporary Swiss practice remains unclear. METHODS: An electronic survey replicating the original questionnaire was distributed to members of the Swiss Foot and Ankle Society. Three standardized clinical cases were presented: mild hallux valgus, severe hallux valgus, and hallux valgus et rigidus. Respondents selected nonoperative versus operative management and specified procedures and fixation methods. Demographics, subspecialty training, and surgical volume were recorded. Current results were compared with prior Swiss data to assess temporal change. RESULTS: Eighty surgeons completed the survey (94% foot and ankle specialists). For mild hallux valgus, 87.7% recommended surgery; Scarf osteotomy remained most common (49.4%), followed by Chevron (21.0%) and Minimally Invasive Hallux Valgus correction (14.8%). Minimally Invasive adopters were predominantly mid-career (83% aged 41-50), high-volume surgeons. For severe hallux valgus, 95.1% favoured surgery; MTPJ arthrodesis was preferred (50.6% isolated; 11.1% with Lapidus), while Minimally Invasive Hallux Valgus correction was rarely chosen (2.5%). In hallux valgus et rigidus, 96% selected MTPJ fusion, most commonly plate-and-screw fixation (45.1%). Compared with 2015, fixation strategies evolved, yet procedure selection remained largely unchanged. CONCLUSION: Despite global expansion of minimally invasive bunion surgery, Swiss surgeons continue to favour established open techniques, particularly Scarf osteotomy and fusion-based strategies. Adoption of MIS remains limited and concentrated among high-volume, mid-career specialists, indicating a cautious national diffusion pattern. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, survey study.

Hallux Valgus↗

PubMed2026

Clinical outcomes of fusion vs excision in the treatment of painful type II accessory naviculars: A matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: For painful Type II accessory naviculars, whether to remove or fuse them remains unclear based on the current literature. This study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of fusion versus excision in treating painful type II accessory naviculars. METHODS: This retrospective comparative study included and followed 54 eligible patients (from May 2017 to March 2023). After 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM), 34 patients (17 fusion versus 17 excision) were analyzed. Outcomes included Visual Analog Scale (VAS), American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) midfoot score, Tegner score, complication rates, and radiographic measurements. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to identify the appropriate accessory navicular size cutoff for predicting nonunion following fusion. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 35.0 ± 9.9 months. The fusion and excision groups showed significant and comparable VAS and AOFAS score improvements (p < .001). The fusion group had a higher complication rate (41.2% vs. 5.9%, p = .039), primarily nonunion and persistent pain. ROC curve analysis identified 50.3 mm² as the cutoff for nonunion risk; sizes < 50.3 mm² predicted high nonunion likelihood. CONCLUSIONS: Both fusion and excision are effective treatments for painful type II accessory naviculars, demonstrating acceptable pain and functional improvement during midterm follow-up. However, the lower complication rate along with relatively superior functional recovery favors the excision technique. For accessory naviculars smaller than 50.3 mm2, excision may be a better choice. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Humans↗