These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Prospective randomized study of chevron osteotomy versus Mitchell's osteotomy in hallux valgus.
    Author: Buciuto R.
    Journal: Foot Ankle Int; 2014 Dec; 35(12):1268-76. PubMed ID: 25209122.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: We conducted a prospective randomized trial to compare the most popular osteotomy types of operative treatment of hallux valgus (HV) used in Norway, Mitchell's osteotomy (MO) and chevron osteotomy (CO). METHODS: One hundred twenty adult female patients were prospectively randomized to treatment with either MO or CO. All operative procedures were performed with ankle block and with tourniquet applied. None of the patients received any antibiotic or antithrombotic prophylaxis. The follow-up period was 3 years. Clinical results were rated according to the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Clinical Rating System (CRS). RESULTS: HV in the MO group was reduced from 30 (range, 20 to 44) to 15 (range, 8 to 24) degrees and IM angle from 11 (range, 6 to 14) to 7 (range, 4 to 11) degrees. HV in the CO group was reduced from 31 (range, 22 to 42) to 16 (range, 6 to 24) degrees and IM angle from 14 (range, 8 to 20) to 6 (range, 2 to 10) degrees. Transfer metatarsalgia occurred in 36 (60%) patients and hammertoe in 6 (10%) patients in the MO group. In the CO group, metatarsalgia occurred in 5 patients. The median loss of postoperative HV correction was 4 (range, 2 to 10) degrees in mild deformity and 6 (6 to 10) degrees in moderate deformity. CONCLUSION: Patients treated with CO had significantly better results for AOFAS CRS, number of postoperative complications, patient satisfaction, and length of sick leave for the employed patients. Based on our results, we consider that in female patients CO should be regarded as the first-line procedure for treatment of mild and moderate HV. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, prospective randomized study.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]