Nonneurologic Cavovarus Feet in Skeletally Immature Patients: Main Causes and Principles of Treatment.

The foot resembles a tripod. The 3 legs consist of (1) the tip of the heel, (2) the first metatarsal, and (3) the fifth metatarsal. This concept is useful to explain cavus or flat feet. When the tips of the tripod move closer, the arch becomes higher. The leg of the tripod that moves the most will determine the type of cavus feet, which can be hindfoot cavus, forefoot cavus, or first metatarsal cavus. Cavovarus foot denotes the presence of a three-dimensional deformity of the foot, but it is much more a descriptive feature than a diagnosis.

Importance of computed tomography in posterior malleolar fractures: Added information to preoperative X-ray studies.

BACKGROUND: Ankle fractures are common lesions of the lower limbs. Approximately 40% of ankle fractures affect the posterior malleolus (PM). Historically, PM osteosynthesis was recommended when PM size in X-ray images was greater than 25% of the joint. Currently, computed tomography (CT) has been gaining traction in the preoperative evaluation of ankle fractures. AIM: To elucidate the similarity in dimensions and to correlate PM size in X-ray images with the articular surface of the affected tibial plafond in the axial view on CT (AXCT) of a PM fracture. METHODS: Eighty-one patients (mean age: 39.4 ± 13.5 years) were evaluated (54.3% were male). Two independent examiners measured PM size in profile X-ray images (PMXR) and sagittal CT (SAGCT) slices. The correlation of the measurements between the examiners and the difference in the PM fragment sizes between the two images were compared. Next, the PM size in PMXR was compared with the surface of the tibial plafond involved in the fracture in AXCT according to the Haraguchi classification. RESULTS: The correlation rates between the examiners were 0.93 and 0.94 for PMXR and SAGCT, respectively (P < 0.001). Fragments were 2.12% larger in SAGCT than in PMXR (P = 0.018). In PMXR, there were 56 cases < 25% and 25 cases ≥ 25%. When PMXR was < 25%, AXCT corresponded to 10.13% of the tibial plafond. When PMXR was ≥ 25%, AXCT was 24.52% (P < 0.001). According to the Haraguchi classification, fracture types I and II had similar PMXR measurements that were greater than those of type III. When analyzing AXCT, a significant difference was found between the three types, with II > I > III (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: PM fractures show different sizes using X-ray or CT images. CT showed a larger PM in the sagittal plane and allowed the visualization of the real dimensions of the tibial plafond surface.