Aims

The Cartiva synthetic cartilage implant (SCI) entered mainstream use in the management of first metatarsophalangeal joint (MTPJ) arthritis following the positive results of large trials in 2016. Limited information is available on the longer-term outcomes of this implant within the literature, particularly when independent from the originator. This single-centre cohort study investigates the efficacy of the Cartiva SCI at up to five years.

Aims

Arthroplasty for end-stage hallux rigidus (HR) is controversial. Arthrodesis remains the gold standard for surgical treatment, although is not without its complications, with rates of up to 10% for nonunion, 14% for reoperation and 10% for metatarsalgia. The aim of this study was to analyze the outcome of a double-stemmed silastic implant (Wright-Medical, Memphis, Tennessee, USA) for patients with end-stage HR.

Introduction:. This study evaluates the mid-term results of first metatarsophalangeal joint replacement (MTPJR) for hallux rigidus using the Toefit-Plus™ prosthesis. Methods:. We prospectively studied the outcomes of 86 MTPJR in 73 patients using the AOFAS-HMI score and radiological follow up over a period from 2006 to 2013, with surgeries performed by a single surgeon at two centres. Patients were reviewed, scored and radiographs obtained pre-operatively and then at intervals of 6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months and then yearly. The mean follow up was 33 months (2–72). Results:. The mean AOFAS score of the patients not requiring revision at 1 year was 92, at 2 years was 94, at 3 years was 91, at 4 years was 99, at 5 years was 93, at 6 years was 100 and at 7 years was 97. 18 joints have either been revised or listed for revision giving a revision rate of 21%; this occurred at a mean of 33 months post-surgery. Reasons for revision included loosening of components in 13, infection in 1, dislocation in 2, malalignment in 1 and persistent pain in 1. Eight patients sustained intra-operative fractures requiring circlage wiring, of which 7 went on to union and one required revision. 25 patients had evidence of radiological loosening of which 22 were around the phalangeal component and 3 were around the metatarsal component. Conclusions:. First MTPJ replacement resulted in improved outcomes in patients with hallux rigidus who do not require revision in the medium term, however the revision rate is unacceptably high and as such we have discontinued use of this prosthesis. Radiological loosening of the components is high and needs monitoring for progression which may necessitate revision

Introduction. There are a number of options available for surgical management of hallux rigidus. Ceramic implants of the first metatarsophalangeal joint (MTPJ) have been available for years; however there are no published long-term results existing. Methods. We performed a retrospective review of all consecutive first MTPJ replacements carried out for later stage hallux rigidus using second generation MOJE ceramic implant with press-fit design. Two specialised foot and ankle surgeons performed these operations at a tertiary referral centre. Patient underwent regular follow ups including clinical review, functional scoring (AOFAS and FFI) and assessment of radiographs. Kaplan Meyer Survival analysis was performed. Results. Our study included 31 prostheses in 24 female patients. Average age at operation was 55.3 years and average follow up time was 80 months. No patients were lost until follow up. Complications included one case of superficial infection and five cases of revision, reasons being fracture of the prostheses (1), unexplained pain (1), subluxation (1) and loosening/sinkage of the implant (2). Prosthesis survival rate was 85.2% at seven years. Assessment of the radiographs showed considerable sinkage of the prosthesis in 43%, tilting in 33% and loosening of the implant in 40.9%. Average postoperative AOFAS score was 71.6 and the average FFI was 27.7. 84% of the patients were satisfied with the results of their operation. Conclusion. Surgery has failed to preserve the function and increase the range of movement in most cases in the long duration. From the patients perspective however the satisfaction with the procedure suggests a success of the implant. Due to poor radiological results and high revision rate we do not recommend the routine use of this prosthesis and all patients that have this type of prosthesis need regular follow up consultations at least yearly with radiographs to assess the position of the implant