Automatic software-based 3D-angular measurement for weight-bearing CT (WBCT) is valid.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare automatic software-based angular measurement (AM) with validated measurement by hand (MBH) regarding angle values and time spent for Weight-Bearing CT (WBCT) generated datasets. METHODS: Five-hundred WBCT scans from different pathologies were included in the study. 1st - 2nd intermetatarsal angle, talo-1st metatarsal angle dorsoplantar and lateral, hindfoot angle, calcaneal pitch angle were measured and compared between MBH and AM. RESULTS: The pathologies were ankle osteoarthritis/instability, n = 147 (29%); Haglund deformity/Achillodynia, n = 41 (8%); forefoot deformity, n = 108 (22%); Hallux rigidus, n = 37 (7%); flatfoot, n = 35 (7%); cavus foot, n = 10 (2%); osteoarthritis except ankle, n = 82 (16%). The angles did not differ between MBH and AM (each p > 0.36). The time spent for MBH / AM was 44.5 / 1 s on average per angle (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: AM provided angles which were not different from validated MBH and can be considered as a validated angle measurement method. The time spent was 97% lower for AM than for MBH. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

EFAS Score - Validation of Danish Version by the Score Committee of the European Foot and Ankle Society (EFAS).

BACKGROUND: The Score Committee of the European Foot and Ankle Society (EFAS) developed, validated, and published the EFAS Score in 13 languages. Currently, the Danish version completed data acquisition and underwent further validation. METHODS: The data were collected pre-operatively and post-operatively at a minimum follow-up of 3 months and mean follow-up of 6 months. Item reduction, scale exploration, confirmatory analyses and responsiveness were executed using classical test theory and item response theory. RESULTS: The internal consistency was confirmed in the Danish version (Cronbach's Alpha 0.88). The Standard Error of Measurement (SEM) was 0.31 and is similar to other language versions. Between baseline and follow-up, 77.2% of patients showed an improvement on their EFAS score, with adequate responsiveness (effect size 1.05). CONCLUSIONS: The Danish EFAS Score version was successfully validated in patients with a wide variety of foot and ankle pathologies. All score versions are freely available at www.efas.net.

EFAS Score-Validation of Spanish and Estonian Versions by the Score Committee of the European Foot and Ankle Society (EFAS).

BACKGROUND: The Score Committee of the European Foot and Ankle Society (EFAS) developed, validated, and published the EFAS Score in 11 languages (Dutch, English, German, Finnish, French, Italian, Polish, Portuguese, Persian, Swedish, Turkish). From other languages under validation, the Spanish and Estonian versions completed data acquisition and underwent further validation. METHODS: The EFAS Score was developed and validated in three stages: 1) item (question) identification (completed during the initial validation study), 2) item reduction and scale exploration (completed during the initial validation study), 3) confirmatory analyses and responsiveness of the Spanish and Estonian versions (completed during the initial validation study in seven other languages). The data were collected pre-operatively and post-operatively at a minimum follow-up of 3 months and mean follow-up of 6 months. Item reduction, scale exploration, confirmatory analyses and responsiveness were executed using classical test theory and item response theory. RESULTS: The internal consistency of the scale was confirmed in the Spanish and Estonian versions (Cronbach's Alpha>0.8). Responsiveness was good, with moderate to large effect sizes in both languages, and evidence of a statistically significant positive association between the EFAS Score and patient-reported improvement. CONCLUSIONS: The Spanish and Estonian EFAS Score versions were successfully validated in orthopaedic ankle and foot surgery patients, with a wide variety of foot and ankle pathologies. All score versions are freely available at www.efas.net.

Comparison of Total Joint Replacement With Arthrodesis of the First Metatarsophalangeal Joint.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare outcome (clinical, patient-reported outcome measures, radiologic, joint motion and pedographic) of total joint replacement with Roto-Glide (RG) and arthrodesis (A) for severe osteoarthritis of the first metatarsophalangeal joint (MTP1). METHODS: All consecutive patients with arthrodesis and RG from January 23, 2011, until September 18, 2019, at the authors' institution were considered for inclusion in the study. Preoperatively and at follow-up (FU), radiographs, and/or weightbearing computed tomographic imaging were obtained. Standard dynamic pedography was performed. Visual analog scale foot and ankle (VASFA), European Foot and Ankle Society (EFAS) score, MTP1 range of motion for dorsiflexion/plantarflexion (DF/PF) were registered and compared preoperatively and at FU. RESULTS: Seventy RG and 72 arthrodesis patients were included. Preoperative VASFA and EFAS scores did not differ between the RG and arthrodesis groups (average scores: VASFA, 50.6 and 45.6; EFAS score, 10.7 and 10.6, respectively; each P > .05). Wound healing delays without further operative measures were registered in 4 patients (6%) for RG and 5 (7%) for arthrodesis (P = .67), and 5 revisions in 5 patients (7%) for RG and 12 in 8 (11%) for arthrodesis (P = .05). The longest available FU was higher in RG than in arthrodesis (47 vs 37 months on average, P < .001). Pedography showed higher first metatarsal head or sesamoids and lower great toe force percentage from force of entire foot in RG than in arthrodesis (P = .05) resulting in physiological pattern in RG only. VASFA and EFAS scores at FU was higher in RG than in arthrodesis (average scores: VASFA, 72.6 and 63.6; EFAS score, 16.1 and 14.1, respectively; each P < .05). DF/PF measurement was only possible in RG (average value: DF/PF, 36.1/14.0). CONCLUSION: We found marginally lower revision rates and higher patient-reported outcome measures, joint motion (DF/PF), and more physiologic force distribution at slightly longer FU for the RG group than the arthrodesis group. Longer follow-up and broader clinical reporting are needed to identify the potential deficits of RG. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Surgical controversies and current concepts in Lisfranc injuries.

INTRODUCTION: Lisfranc injuries, not as rare as previously reported, range from ligamentous to complex fracture-dislocations. Anatomical studies have identified a complex of discrete structures, and defined the anatomical characteristics of the Lisfranc joint. SOURCES OF DATA: A narrative evidence-based review encompassed and analyzed published systematic reviews. Outcomes included clinical and surgical decision-making, including clinical-presentation, diagnosis, pathological-assessment, surgical-management techniques and indications, post-surgical care and comparative outcomes. AREAS OF AGREEMENT: Better understanding of the Lisfranc complex anatomy aids surgical treatment and tactics. Prognosis is related to injury severity, estimated by the number of foot columns affected. Surgical outcome is determined by anatomical reduction for most fixation and fusion techniques. Appropriate treatment allows return to sport, improving outcome scores. AREAS OF CONTROVERSY: Identification of Lisfranc injuries may be improved by imaging modalities such as weight-bearing computer tomography. Recent evidence supports dorsal plate fixation as a result of better quality of reduction. In complex injuries, the use of combined techniques such as trans-articular screw and plate fixation has been associated with poorer outcomes, and fusion may instead offer greater benefits. GROWING POINTS: Open reduction is mandatory if closed reduction fails, highlighting the importance of understanding surgical anatomy. If anatomical reduction is achieved, acute arthrodesis is a safe alternative to open reduction internal fixation in selected patients, as demonstrated by comparable outcomes in subgroup analysis. AREAS FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH: The current controversies in surgical treatment remain around techniques and outcomes, as randomized controlled trials are infrequent.

Autologous matrix induced chondrogenesis plus peripheral blood concentrate (AMIC+PBC) in chondral lesions at the ankle as part of a complex surgical approach - 5-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to assess 5-year-follow-up (5FU) after Autologous Matrix Induced Chondrogenesis plus Peripheral Blood Concentrate (AMIC+PBC) in chondral lesions at the ankle as part of a complex surgical approach. METHODS: In a prospective consecutive non-controlled clinical follow-up study, all patients with chondral lesion at the ankle treated with AMIC+PBC from July 17, 2016 to May 31, 2017 were included. Size and location of the chondral lesions, the Visual-Analogue-Scale Foot and Ankle (VAS FA) and the EFAS Score before treatment and at 5FU were analysed and compared with previous 2-year-follow-up (2FU). Peripheral Blood Concentrate (PBC) was used to impregnate a collagen I/III matrix (Chondro-Gide, Wolhusen, Switzerland) that was fixed into the chondral lesion with fibrin glue. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-nine patients with 136 chondral lesions were included in the study. The chondral lesions were located as follows (n (%)), medial talar shoulder only, 62 (46); lateral talar shoulder only, 42 (31); medial and lateral talar shoulder, 7 (10); tibia, 18 (13). The average for lesion size was 1.8 cm2, for VAS FA 45.7 and for EFAS Score 9.8. 2FU/5FU was completed in 105 (81 %)/104(81 %) patients with 112/111 previous chondral lesions. VAS FA improved to 79.8/84.2 and EFAS Score to 20.3/21.5 (2FU/5FU). No parameter significantly differed 2FU and 5FU. CONCLUSIONS: AMIC+PBC as part of a complex surgical approach led to improved and high validated outcome scores at 2FU/5FU. 2FU and 5FU did not differ.

Autologous matrix induced chondrogenesis plus peripheral blood concentrate (AMIC+PBC) in chondral defects of the first metatarsophalangeal joint - 5-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to assess the 5-year-follow-up (5FU) after Autologous Matrix Induced Chondrogenesis plus Peripheral Blood Concentrate (AMIC+PBC) in chondral defects at the first metatarsophalangeal joint (MTP1). MATERIAL AND METHODS: In a prospective consecutive non-controlled clinical follow-up study, all patients with chondral lesion at MTP1 that were treated with AMIC+PBC from July 17, 2016 to May 31, 2017 were included. Size and location of the chondral lesions, the Visual-Analogue-Scale Foot and Ankle (VAS FA) and the EFAS Score before treatment and at 5FU were analysed and compared with previous 2-year-follow-up (2FU). Peripheral Blood Concentrate (PBC) was used to impregnate a collagen I/III matrix (Chondro-Gide, Wolhusen, Switzerland) that was fixed into the chondral lesion with fibrin glue. RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-eight patients with 238 chondral defects were included. In 21 % of patients no deformities in the forefoot were registered. The average degree of osteoarthritis was 2.2. The chondral defect size was 1.0 cm2 on average. The most common location was metatarsal dorsal (33 %), and in most patients one defect was registered (74 %). Corrective osteotomy of the first metatarsal was performed in 79 %. 176 (89 %)/164 (83 %) patients completed 2FU/5FU. VAS FA/EFAS Score were preoperatively 46.8/11.9 and improved to 74.1/17.1 at 2FU and 75.0/17.3 at 5FU on average. No parameter significantly differed between 2FU and 5FU. CONCLUSIONS: AMIC+PBC as treatment for chondral defects at MTP1 as part of joint preserving surgery led to improved and high validated outcome scores at 2FU and 5FU. The results between 2FU and 5FU did not differ.

EFAS Score - Validation of Portuguese Version by the Score Committee of the European Foot and Ankle Society (EFAS).

BACKGROUND: The Score Committee of the European Foot and Ankle Society (EFAS) developed, validated, and published the EFAS Score in ten languages (English, German, French, Italian, Polish, Dutch, Swedish, Finnish, Turkish, Portuguese). From other languages under validation, the Portuguese version completed data acquisition and underwent further validation. METHODS: The Portuguese version of the EFAS Score was developed and validated in three stages: 1) item (question) identification (completed during initial validation study), 2) item reduction and scale exploration (completed during initial validation study), 3) confirmatory analyses and responsiveness of Portuguese version (completed during initial validation study in nine other languages). The data were collected pre-operatively and post-operatively at a minimum follow-up of 3 months and mean follow-up of 6 months. Item reduction, scale exploration, confirmatory analyses and responsiveness were executed using classical test theory and item response theory. RESULTS: The internal consistency was confirmed in the Portuguese version (Cronbach's Alpha 0.84). The Standard Error of Measurement (SEM) was 0.27 and is similar to other language versions. Between baseline and follow-up, 69.4% of patients showed an improvement on their EFAS score, with adequate responsiveness (effect size 0.64). CONCLUSIONS: The Portuguese EFAS Score version was successfully validated in patients with a wide variety of foot and ankle pathologies. All score versions are freely available at www.efas.net.

Fiber-reinforced fixation implant for proximal interphalangeal joint arthrodesis shows advanced implant bio-integration at 2-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: A bio-integrative fiber-reinforced implant (OSSIOfiber® Hammertoe Fixation Implant, OSSIO Ltd., Caesarea, Israel) for proximal interphalangeal joint (PIPJ) correction-arthrodesis showed partial bio-integration at 1-year follow-up (1FU) in a previous study. The study was prolonged to assess the bio-integration at 2-year-follow-up (2FU). METHODS: Twenty-four patients with proximal interphalangeal joint (PIPJ) correction-arthrodesis using the fiber-reinforced implant and analysed at 1FU, completed 2FU. Follow-up included clinical examination, patient reported outcomes, radiographs, MRI and bio-integration scoring. Results were compared between the 1FU and 2FU (paired t-test). RESULTS: Radiographs confirmed fusion in 96 % (n = 23) at 2FU (1FU, 92 % (n = 22)). Implant was no longer visible in 21 % (n = 5), partially visible in 33 % (n = 8), and fully visible in 46 % (n = 11)(1FU, fully visible 100 % (n = 24)). The border between implant and surrounding bone was scored not visible in 88 % (n = 21) and partially visible in 12 % (n = 3) (1FU, border partially visible 100 % (n = 24)). There were no cyst formation or fluid accumulation findings 1FU/2FU. Mild bone edema was detected in 4 % (n = 1) (1FU, 29 % (n = 7)). None of the edema findings were considered as adverse implant related. The mean bio-integration score was 9.71 ± 0.69 at 2FU (1FU, 7.71 ± 0.46). The parameters of border between implant and bone and bone edema further improved at the 2FU compared to the 1FU, total bio-integration score was also higher at 2FU than 1FU (each p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates 96 % PIPJ fusion rate and increased bio-integration from 1FU to 2FU, reaching advanced bio-integration of the fiber-reinforced implant at 2FU.

The Assessment of Ankle Osteoarthritis with Weight-Bearing Computed Tomography.

The standard for diagnostic radiographic imaging in foot and ankle surgery was until 2012 radiographs with full weight-bearing without any useful alternative. Weight-bearing cone-beam computed tomography (WBCT) was introduced 2012 for foot and ankle use as a new technology that allows 3D imaging with full weight-bearing which should be not influenced by projection and/or foot orientation. The assessment of ankle osteoarthritis with WBCT including the description of healthy status, effect of alignment and7or (in)stability is extensively illustrated in this review article.

Semi-automatic software-based 3D-angular measurement for Weight-Bearing CT (WBCT) in the foot provides different angles than measurement by hand.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare semi-automatic software-based angular measurement (SAM) with previously validated measurement by hand (MBH) regarding angle values and time spent for the investigator for Weight-Bearing CT (WBCT). METHODS: In this retrospective comparative study, five-hundred bilateral WBCT scans (PedCAT, Curvebeam, Warrington, PA, USA) were included in the study. Five angles (1st - 2nd intermetatarsal angle (IM), talo-metatarsal 1-angle (TMT) dorsoplantar and lateral projection, hindfoot angle, calcaneal pitch angle) were measured with MBH and SAM (Bonelogic Ortho Foot and Ankle, Version 1.0.0-R, Disior Ltd, Helsinki, Finland) on the right/left foot/ankle. The angles and time spent of MBH and SAM were compared (t-test, homoscesdatic). RESULTS: The angles differed between MBH and SAM (mean values MBH/SAM; IM, 9.1/13.0; TMT dorsoplantar, -3.4/8.2; TMT lateral. -6.4/-1.1; hindfoot angle, 4.6/21.6; calcaneal pitch angle, 20.5/20.1; each p < 0.001 except the calcaneal pitch angle, p = 0.35). The time spent for MBH / SAM was 44.5 ± 12 s / 12 ± 0 s on average per angle (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: SAM provided different angles as MBH (except calcaneal pitch angle) and can currently not be considered as validated angle measurement method (except calcaneal pitch angle). The investigator time spent is 73% lower for SAM (12 s per angle) than for MBH (44.5 s per angle). SAM might be an important step forward for 3D-angle measurement of WBCT when valid angles are provided.

Fiber-reinforced fixation implant for proximal interphalangeal joint arthrodesis shows implant bio-integration at 1-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: A new bio-integrative fiber-reinforced implant (OSSIOfiber® Hammertoe Fixation Implant, OSSIO Ltd., Caesarea, Israel) was developed for proximal interphalangeal joint (PIPJ) correction-arthrodesis. The main purpose of this clinical study was to assess implant bio-integration at 1-year follow-up. METHODS: Twenty-four patients, previously treated for a Hammertoe deformity using the bio-integrative, fiber-reinforced implant, were enrolled in this follow-up study. One-year follow-up included clinical examination, patient reported outcomes, radiographs, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and bio-integration scoring. RESULTS: Proximal interphalangeal joint (PIPJ) radiographic fusion rate was 92% (n = 22). MRI was analyzed for 24 (100%) patients. In 100% of patients (n = 24), the border between implant and surrounding tissue was scored as partially visible. There were no cyst formation or fluid accumulation findings. Mild bone edema was detected in 29% (n = 7) and is attributed to the chronic distribution of forces due to chronic abnormal gait and pasture. None of the edema findings were considered as adverse implant-related finding. The mean bio-integration score was 7.71 ± 0.46. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates safe bio-integration of the newly developed fiber-reinforced implant at 1-year follow-up without negative side effects.