Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Bone & Joint 360
Vol. 4, Issue 3 | Pages 15 - 16
1 Jun 2015

The June 2015 Foot & Ankle Roundup360 looks at: Syndesmosis and outcomes in ankle fracture; Ankle arthrodesis or arthroplasty: a complications-based analysis; Crosslinked polyethylene and ankle arthroplasty; Reducing screw removal in calcaneal osteotomies; Revisiting infection control policies; Chevron osteotomy: proximal or distal?; Ankle distraction for osteoarthritis


Moderate to severe hallux valgus is conventionally treated by proximal metatarsal osteotomy. Several recent studies have shown that the indications for distal metatarsal osteotomy with a distal soft-tissue procedure could be extended to include moderate to severe hallux valgus. The purpose of this prospective randomised controlled trial was to compare the outcome of proximal and distal Chevron osteotomy in patients undergoing simultaneous bilateral correction of moderate to severe hallux valgus. The original study cohort consisted of 50 female patients (100 feet). Of these, four (8 feet) were excluded for lack of adequate follow-up, leaving 46 female patients (92 feet) in the study. The mean age of the patients was 53.8 years (30.1 to 62.1) and the mean duration of follow-up 40.2 months (24.1 to 80.5). After randomisation, patients underwent a proximal Chevron osteotomy on one foot and a distal Chevron osteotomy on the other. At follow-up, the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) hallux metatarsophalangeal interphalangeal (MTP-IP) score, patient satisfaction, post-operative complications, hallux valgus angle, first-second intermetatarsal angle, and tibial sesamoid position were similar in each group. Both procedures gave similar good clinical and radiological outcomes. This study suggests that distal Chevron osteotomy with a distal soft-tissue procedure is as effective and reliable a means of correcting moderate to severe hallux valgus as proximal Chevron osteotomy with a distal soft-tissue procedure. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:202–7