1. Lesser Toe PIP Joint Resection Versus PIP Joint Fusion
- Author
-
Cees C.P.M. Verheyen, Joost C.M. Schrier, Noël L.W. Keijsers, Giovanni Matricali, and Jan Willem K. Louwerens
- Subjects
Foot Deformities ,Metatarsophalangeal Joint ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Visual analogue scale ,Joint Prosthesis ,Arthrodesis ,medicine.medical_treatment ,Ankylosis ,Arthroplasty ,law.invention ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Randomized controlled trial ,law ,medicine ,Humans ,Orthopedics and Sports Medicine ,Pain Measurement ,Retrospective Studies ,030222 orthopedics ,business.industry ,Hammer Toe Syndrome ,030229 sport sciences ,Toes ,medicine.disease ,Surgery ,Radiography ,Treatment Outcome ,medicine.anatomical_structure ,Ankle ,Interphalangeal Joint ,business - Abstract
Background: It is unclear whether proximal interphalangeal joint (PIPJ) resection or fusion leads to superior clinical outcome in patients undergoing hammertoe surgery. The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate a series of patients undergoing this surgery. Methods: Patients with one or more toes with rigid PIP flexion deformity were prospectively enrolled. These patients were randomly assigned to undergo either PIPJ resection or PIPJ fusion. In addition to the PIPJ procedure, a metatarsophalangeal joint (MTPJ) release was performed if deemed necessary. Follow-up was up to 1 year postoperatively. Twenty-six patients (39 toes) were included in the PIPJ resection group and 29 (50 toes) in the PIPJ fusion group. Results: Thirty-four underwent an MTPJ release. No significant difference in foot outcome scores (American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society scale, the Foot Function Index, and visual analog scale pain) could be detected after 1-year follow-up. A statistically significant difference was found regarding the toe alignment in the sagittal plane in favor of PIPJ fusion. Conclusions: Our randomized controlled study did not show any clinical outcome difference between PIPJ fusion and PIPJ resection. Both procedures resulted in good to excellent outcome in pain and activity scores. Level of Evidence: Level II, lesser quality RCT or prospective comparative study.
- Published
- 2016
- Full Text
- View/download PDF