The use of the Lapidus for recurrent hallux valgus
The objective of this study was to evaluate the Lapidus procedure or it’s modifications for treatment of recurrent hallux valgus (HV). Our hypothesis was that the Lapidus procedure would achieve good correction of recurrent HV and patients would be satisfied.
A retrospective review of 32 feet (30 patients) treated with the Lapidus procedure for recurrent HV with at least 1-year followup was performed. Evaluation included radiographs, examination, and chart review. Outcomes were assessed with a pain visual analog scale (VAS), American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) hallux score, SF-12, Revised Foot Function Index (RFFI), and a survey. Twenty-three of 30 patients (25 feet) met the criteria for inclusion in the study and were available for followup evaluation. The average followup was 31.6 months.
Arthrodesis was present in 24 out of 25 feet (96%). The time from initial HV correction to revision surgery was 91 months. The initial surgery performed was a distal osteotomy (15), proximal osteotomy (five), exostectomy (two), diaphyseal osteotomy (two), and proximal/distal osteotomy (one). Preoperative evaluation revealed 96% of patients had clinical hypermobility of the first TMT joint and 52% had radiographic findings of instability. The average postoperative AOFAS hallux score was 82.8, SF-12 score was 94.5, and RFFI was 101. The average preoperative hallux valgus angle (HVA), intermetatarsal angle (IMA), and distal metatarsal articular angle (DMAA) were 36.2, 13.6, 18.6 degrees, respectively, which corrected to an average of 15.2, 7.5, 11.7 degrees postoperatively (p < 0.001). The average shortening of the first ray was 2.9 mm. Average pain VAS was 2.4. Eighty-seven percent reported good to excellent results. Using a multivariable linear regression analysis, postoperative HVA along with change in length of the first ray were significant predictors of quality of life based on SF-12 (p < 0.05).
The Lapidus procedure corrected recurrent HV with a low nonunion rate and excellent radiographic correction and patients were satisfied with their outcome.
IV, Retrospective Case SeriesBack