Stiffness of the human foot and evolution of the transverse arch.

The stiff human foot enables an efficient push-off when walking or running, and was critical for the evolution of bipedalism1-6. The uniquely arched morphology of the human midfoot is thought to stiffen it5-9, whereas other primates have flat feet that bend severely in the midfoot7,10,11. However, the relationship between midfoot geometry and stiffness remains debated in foot biomechanics12,13, podiatry14,15 and palaeontology4-6. These debates centre on the medial longitudinal arch5,6 and have not considered whether stiffness is affected by the second, transverse tarsal arch of the human foot16. Here we show that the transverse tarsal arch, acting through the inter-metatarsal tissues, is responsible for more than 40% of the longitudinal stiffness of the foot. The underlying principle resembles a floppy currency note that stiffens considerably when it curls transversally. We derive a dimensionless curvature parameter that governs the stiffness contribution of the transverse tarsal arch, demonstrate its predictive power using mechanical models of the foot and find its skeletal correlate in hominin feet. In the foot, the material properties of the inter-metatarsal tissues and the mobility of the metatarsals may additionally influence the longitudinal stiffness of the foot and thus the curvature-stiffness relationship of the transverse tarsal arch. By analysing fossils, we track the evolution of the curvature parameter among extinct hominins and show that a human-like transverse arch was a key step in the evolution of human bipedalism that predates the genus Homo by at least 1.5 million years. This renewed understanding of the foot may improve the clinical treatment of flatfoot disorders, the design of robotic feet and the study of foot function in locomotion.

Pes cavovarus in Charcot-Marie-Tooth compared to the idiopathic cavovarus foot: A preliminary weightbearing CT analysis.

BACKGROUND: Pes cavovarus is a foot deformity that can be idiopathic (I-PC) or acquired secondary to other pathology. Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease (CMT) is the most common adult cause for acquired pes cavovarus deformity (CMT-PC). The foot morphology of these distinct patient groups has not been previously investigated. The aim of this study was to assess if morphological differences exist between CMT-PC, I-PC and normal feet (controls) using weightbearing computed tomography (WBCT). METHODS: A retrospective analysis of WBCT scans performed between May 2013 and June 2017 was undertaken. WBCT scans from 17 CMT-PC, 17 I-PC and 17 healthy normally-aligned control feet (age-, side-, sex- and body mass index-matched) identified from a prospectively collected database, were analysed. Eight 2-dimensional (2D) and three 3-dimensional (3D) measurements were undertaken for each foot and mean values in the three groups were compared using one-way ANOVA with the Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: Significant differences were observed between CMT-PC or I-PC and controls (p<0.05). Two-dimensional measurements were similar in CMT-PC and I-PC, except for forefoot arch angle (p=0.04). 3D measurements (foot and ankle offset, calcaneal offset and hindfoot alignment angle) demonstrated that CMT-PC exhibited more severe hindfoot varus malalignment than I-PC (p=0.03, 0.04 and 0.02 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: CMT-related cavovarus and idiopathic cavovarus feet are morphologically different from healthy feet, and CMT feet exhibit increased forefoot supination and hindfoot malalignment compared to idiopathic forms. The use of novel three-dimensional analysis may help highlight subtle structural differences in patients with similar foot morphology but aetiologically different pathology. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Intraobserver and interobserver reliability of cone beam weightbearing semi-automatic three-dimensional measurements in symptomatic pes cavovarus.

INTRODUCTION: Pes cavovarus is a three-dimensional (3D) foot deformity. New 3D semi-automatic measurements utilising weightbearing computerised topography (WBCT) images have recently been proposed to assess hindfoot alignment, but reliability in pes cavovarus has never been investigated. The aim of this study was to assess intraobserver and interobserver reliability of the foot ankle offset (FAO), calcaneal offset (CO) and hindfoot alignment angle (HAA) in pes cavovarus. METHODS: Anonymised WBCT datasets from 51 feet (17 Charcot-Marie-Tooth related cavovarus, 17 idiopathic cavovarus and 17 controls) were retrospectively reviewed. Three observers (two senior foot and ankle fellows and one orthopaedic resident) independently measured FAO, CO and HAA using dedicated software, with measurements repeated two weeks apart. Subgroup analysis was performed to assess whether aetiology or severity of varus deformity and level of seniority affected reliability. RESULTS: Mean values for intra and interobserver reliability for FAO (r=0.98; ICC: 0.99), CO (r=0.97; ICC: 0.98) and HAA measurements (r=0.97; ICC: 0.98) were excellent. Subgroup analyses showed that FAO, CO and HAA's intra (r/ρ range, 0.77-0.95) and interobserver (ICC range, 0.88-0.98) reliability remained excellent in patients with Charcot-Marie-Tooth related cavovarus, idiopathic pes cavovarus and normal feet, regardless of the severity of deformity. No difference was found in FAO, CO and HAA mean values from three observers (p>0.05 in all cases). DISCUSSION: This study demonstrates that 3D semi-automatic measurements of WBCT images have excellent intra and interobserver reliability in the assessment of hindfoot alignment in pes cavovarus. Aetiology and severity of deformity, and level of seniority do not affect reliability of these measurements. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

An Analysis of Relative Gait Impairment in Commonly Diagnosed Pediatric Conditions.

BACKGROUND: Gait indices were developed to represent the magnitude of impairment extracted from a gait analysis with a single value. The Gillette Gait Index (GGI), and the Gait Deviation Index (GDI) are 2 widely used indices that represent gait impairment differently based on their statistical properties. Our purpose was to (1) report on the results of gait analysis for a broad spectrum of pediatric conditions using the GGI and GDI, and (2) identify the parameters that dominate impairment. METHODS: A total of 1439 children with 13 different diagnoses with a complete, baseline gait analysis were identified. The GGI and its 16 parameters were calculated in all cases, and the GDI was calculated from a smaller subset. T tests, and z-scores were used to compare each of these values to typically developing children for each diagnosis. A separate linear regression controlling for age, sex, and use of an orthosis, or assistive device was performed for the GGI. RESULTS: In our series, there were 71 typically developing children with a GGI of 31. We qualify relative gait impairment as severe, mild, or moderate as based on the GGI, and propose that values <100 represent mild, 100 to 200 represent moderate, and >200 represents severe impairment. On the basis of strong correlation between the GGI and GDI, we suggest that GDI values >80 represent mild, and values <70 represent severe impairment. T tests and z-scores demonstrated that both the number and magnitude of abnormal parameters increase the GGI. These tests also identified the most clinically relevant parameters contributing to functional impairment for each diagnosis. Multivariate linear regression showed that all diagnoses except flatfoot and scoliosis demonstrated statistically significant differences in GGI scores. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to apply these gait indices to a large population of diverse pediatric conditions. We propose GGI and GDI values to qualify gait impairment among these conditions as severe, moderate, or mild. Furthermore, impairment in gait reflects both the number and magnitude of abnormal parameters within each condition. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III-retrospective comparative study.

Hindfoot flexibility assessment of cavovarus and planovalgus feet by modified Shriners Hospitals for Children - Greenville (mSHCG) foot model.

BACKGROUND: Multi-segment foot models have been used to quantify foot kinematics during walking. However, walking kinematics is not sufficient to assess hindfoot flexibility (available range of hindfoot varus-valgus motion). The modified Shriners Hospitals for Children - Greenville (mSHCG) foot model has been used to quantify hindfoot flexibility with Coleman block test (peak hindfoot valgus) and Root test (peak hindfoot varus). Sensitivity of mSHCG foot model to detect clinically relevant difference in hindfoot flexibility measures for planovalgus (PV) and cavovarus (CV) feet has not been demonstrated. RESEARCH QUESTION: Can mSHCG foot model detect statistically significant difference in hindfoot flexibility measures between PV, CV and typically developing (TD) feet? METHODS: Hindfoot flexibility assessment was completed for 32 PV (37 feet), 27 CV (37 feet) and 20 TD (40 feet) individuals. Hindfoot position relative to tibia in coronal plane was measured in three postures: standing, heel raise and Coleman block test. Radiographic measures in standing position were also completed for PV and CV individuals and their correlation with hindfoot flexibility measures were evaluated. RESULTS: Statistically significant (p<0.001) differences were observed between three groups (TD, PV, CV) in all three hindfoot flexibility measures- (i) Hindfoot varus in standing position (ii) Peak hindfoot varus in heel raise and (iii) Peak hindfoot valgus in Coleman block test. There was relatively stronger correlation (R2=0.407-0.854) between three radiographic measures and hindfoot varus in standing position. Correlation between hindfoot range of motion towards valgus from standing to Coleman block test and the three radiographic measures was weaker (R2=0.2329-0.3042). SIGNIFICANCE: Hindfoot flexibility assessment can detect statistically significant difference between PV, CV and TD feet and provides additional information about available dynamic range of motion of hindfoot in the coronal plane that cannot be predicted from radiographic measures. Therefore, hindfoot flexibility assessment may assist in treatment planning of foot deformities.

Ability of a multi-segment foot model to measure kinematic differences in cavus, neutrally aligned, asymptomatic planus, and symptomatic planus foot types.

BACKGROUND: Multi-segment foot models (MFMs) provide a better understanding of the intricate biomechanics of the foot, yet it is unclear if they accurately differentiate foot type function during locomotion. RESEARCH QUESTION: We employed an MFM to detect subtle kinematic differences between foot types, including: pes cavus, neutrally aligned, and asymptomatic and symptomatic pes planus. The study investigates how variable the results of this MFM are and if it can detect kinematic differences between pathologic and non-pathologic foot types during the stance phase of gait. METHODS: Independently, three raters instrumented three subjects on three days to assess variability. In a separate cohort, each foot type was statically quantified for ten subjects per group. Each subject walked while instrumented with a four-segment foot model to assess static alignment and foot motion during the stance phase of gait. Statistical analysis performed with a linear mixed effects regression. RESULTS: Model variability was highest for between-day and lowest for between-rater, with all variability measures being within the true sample variance. Almost all static measures (radiographic, digital scan, and kinematic markers) differed significantly by foot type. Sagittal hindfoot to leg and forefoot to leg kinematics differed between foot types during late stance, as well as coronal hallux to forefoot range of motion. The MFM had low between-rater variability and may be suitable for multiple raters to apply to a single study sample without introducing significant error. The model, however, only detected a few dynamic differences, with the most dramatic being the hallux to forefoot coronal plane range of motion. SIGNIFICANCE: Results only somewhat aligned with previous work. It remains unclear if the MFM is sensitive enough to accurately detect different motion between foot types (pathologic and non-pathologic). A more accurate method of tracking foot bone motion (e.g., biplane fluoroscopy) may be needed to address this question.

Hindfoot Alignment in Flexible Cavovarus Deformity Under Orthostatic and Coleman Block Test Positions: A Weightbearing Computed Tomography Study.

BACKGROUND: Flexible cavovarus deformity is prevalent and the Coleman block test is frequently used to assess the first ray plantarflexion malpositioning in the overall deformity as well as the flexibility of the hindfoot. The objective was to assess and compare the weightbearing computed tomography (WBCT) 3-dimensional (3D) changes in clinical and bone alignment in flexible cavovarus deformity patients when performing the Coleman block test when compared to normal standing position and to controls. METHODS: Twenty patients (40 feet) with flexible cavovarus deformity and 20 volunteer controls (40 feet) with normal foot alignment underwent WBCT imaging of the foot and ankle. Cavovarus patients were assessed in normal orthostatic and Coleman block test positions. Foot and ankle offset (FAO), hindfoot alignment angle (HAA), talocalcaneal angle (TCA), subtalar vertical angle (SVA) and talonavicular coverage angle (TNCA) and a CT-simulated soft tissue envelope image, WBCT clinical hindfoot alignment angle (WBCT-CHAA), were evaluated by 2 readers. Measurements were compared between cavovarus nonstressed and stressed positions and to controls. P values of .05 or less were considered significant. RESULTS: The intra- and interobserver intraclass correlation coefficient were good or excellent for all WBCT measurements. Cavovarus patients demonstrated significant correction of WBCT-CHAA (9.7 ± 0.4 degrees), FAO (2.6 ± 0.4%), and TNCA (8.8 ± 1.8 degrees) when performing the Coleman block test (all P values <.0001). However, WBCT-CHAA and FAO measurements were still residually deformed and significantly different from controls (P values of .001 and <.0001, respectively). TNCA values corrected to values similar to healthy controls (P = .29). No differences were observed in cavovarus patients during Coleman block test for the coronal measures: HAA, TCA, and SVA measurements. CONCLUSION: In this study, we observed improvement in the overall 3D WBCT alignment (FAO), axial plane adduction deformity (TNCA), as well as CT simulated clinical hindfoot alignment (WBCT-CHAA) in flexible cavovarus deformity patients when performing a Coleman block test. However, we did not find improvement in measures of coronal alignment of the hindfoot, indicating continued varus positioning of the hindfoot in these patients.

Does the Sagittal Radiographic Morphology of Subtalar Joint Affect the Alignment of Foot?

OBJECTIVES: The etiology of flatfoot and cavus foot is multicausal and controversial. So far, no literature reports the relationship between the sagittal morphology of subtalar joint and the alignment of foot. The purpose of this study was to explore whether the subtalar alignment would influence the configuration of foot. METHODS: From January 2017 to January 2020, we included 109 feet in the flatfoot group, 95 feet in the cavus group, and 104 feet in the control group in this retrospective comparative study. The Gissane angle and calcaneal posterior articular surface inclination angle represented the sagittal morphology of the subtalar joint. Meary's angle, calcaneal pitch angle, and talar pitch angle reflected the alignment of foot. They were measured in the weightbearing foot X-rays. The angles in different groups were compared via Mann-Whitney U test. We calculated the correlation between the sagittal alignment of subtalar joint and the alignment of foot using Spearman's correlation analysis. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability were calculated. RESULTS: The Gissane angle, calcaneal posterior articular surface inclination angle, Meary's angle, talar pitch angle, and calcaneal pitch angle were significantly different in the three groups. The Gissane angle had an excellent correlation with the Meary's angle (r = 0.850, p < 0.0001), and the talar pitch angle (r = -0.825, p < 0.0001), and a good correlation with the calcaneal pitch angle (r = 0.638, p < 0.0001). The calcaneal posterior articular surface inclination angle had an excellent correlation with the Meary's angle (r = -0.902, p < 0.001), and the talar pitch angle (r = 0.887, p < 0.0001), and a good correlation with the calcaneal pitch angle (r = -0.702, p < 0.0001). The interobserver and intraobserver reliability for all radiographic measurements was good to excellent. CONCLUSION: A subtalar joint with a larger Gissane angle and a more horizontal calcaneal posterior articular surface angle tended to have a higher foot arch and vice versa. The inspiration from this study was that the deformities of flatfoot and cavus foot may relate to the subtalar deformity.

Forefoot Morphotypes in Cavovarus Feet: A Novel Assessment of Deformity.

BACKGROUND: The cavovarus foot is a complex 3-dimensional deformity. Although a multitude of techniques are described for its surgical management, few of these are evidence based or guided by classification systems. Surgical management involves realignment of the hindfoot and soft tissue balancing, followed by forefoot balancing. Our aim was to analyze the pattern of residual forefoot deformities once the hindfoot is corrected, to guide forefoot correction. METHODS: We included 20 cavovarus feet from 16 adult patients with Charcot-Marie-Tooth who underwent weightbearing CT (mean age 43.4 years, range: 22-78 years, 14 males). Patients included had flexible deformities, with no previous surgery. Using specialized software (Bonelogic 2.1, Disior) a 3-dimensional, virtual model was created. Using morphologic data captured from normal feet in patients without pathology as a guide, the talonavicular joint of the cavovarus foot was digitally reduced to a "normal" position to simulate the correction that would be achieved during surgical correction. Models of the corrected position were exported and geometrically analyzed using Blender 3.64 to identify anatomical trends. RESULTS: We identified 4 types of cavovarus forefoot morphotypes. Type 0 was defined as a balanced forefoot (2 cases, 10%). Type 1 was defined as a forefoot where the first metatarsal was relatively plantarflexed to the rest of the foot, with no significant residual adduction after talonavicular joint correction (12 cases, 60%). Type 2 was defined as a forefoot where the second and first metatarsals were progressively plantarflexed, with no significant adduction (4 cases, 20%). Type 3 was defined as a forefoot where the metatarsals were adducted after talonavicular derotation (2 cases, 10%). CONCLUSION: In this relatively small cohort, we identified 4 forefoot morphotypes in cavovarus feet that might help surgeons to recognize and anticipate the residual forefoot deformities after hindfoot correction. Different treatment strategies may be required for different morphotypes to achieve balanced correction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, retrospective case series.

Pes Cavus Deformity: Anatomic, Functional Considerations, and Surgical Implications.

Pes cavus is a complicated, multiplanar deformity that requires a thorough understanding in order to provide the appropriate level of care. The foot and ankle surgeon should perform a comprehensive examination, including a neurologic evaluation, in the workup of this patient population. Understanding the cause of the patient's deformity is a critical step in predicting the disease course as well as the most acceptable form of treatment. The surgical correlation with the patient's pathologic anatomy requires an in-depth clinical evaluation, in addition to the radiographic findings, as the radiographic findings do not necessarily correlate with the patient's discomfort.

The Subtle Cavovarus Foot Deformity: The Nonneurologic Form of Cavus Foot Deformity.

Conditions of ankle instability, peroneal tendon tears, and stress fractures of the lateral metatarsals are commonly encountered in a clinical foot and ankle practice. Evaluation of the supporting foot structure is critical to prevent failure of index procedures. The prominence of the subtle cavus foot is now a recognized entity and must be properly diagnosed and addressed surgically.

Influence of the medial longitudinal arch of the foot in adult women in ankle isokinetic performance: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Maintenance of the medial longitudinal arch (MLA) of the foot is fundamental during functional tasks and disorders can lead to clinical alterations. Studies have demonstrated that deficits in ankle isokinetic performance can predispose an individual to lower limb injuries. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the muscular performance of cavus, planus, and normal feet by means of torque/body mass and the isokinetic phases, to generate 3D surface map analysis, and to verify whether there is a relationship between MLA height and arch height flexibility with isokinetic performance. METHODS: The sample consisted of 105 healthy adult women, divided into three groups: normal, cavus, and planus. Assessment in concentric mode at 30, 60, and 90 °/s in the dorsiflexion and plantarflexion of the ankle joint were analyzed during the three isokinetic phases (acceleration, sustained velocity, and deceleration). The variables total range of motion, peak of torque (PT), and angle of PT were extracted within the sustained velocity. RESULTS: In dorsiflexion at 60 °/s, the phase where the velocicty is sustained (load range phase) was higher in the planus group (MeanDifference=10.9 %; ω2p = 0.06) when compared with the cavus group. Deficits in the peak torque/body mass in dorsiflexion at 60 °/s (cavus feet: MD=-3 N.m/kg; ω2p = 0.06; and planus feet: MD=-1.1 N.m/kg; ω2p = 0.06) were also observed as well as in the 3D surface maps, when compared with the normal group. The flexibility of MLA had a negative correlation of PT at 30 °/s in cavus group. The heigth of MLA had a postive correlation with the PT for the cavus and planus group ate 60 °/s. All other results did not show differences between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The planus groups showed a better capacity of attain and sustained the velocity in dorsiflexion in relation the cavus group. The cavus and planus group had deficts in torque in relation the normal. The correlations were weak between the measures of MLA and PT. Thereby, in general the differences between foot types showed small effect in isokinetic muscle performance measures of the plantar and dorsi flexores. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Study design was approved by the IRB (#90238618.8.0000.5231).

Biomechanical effects of foot orthoses with and without a lateral bar in individuals with cavus feet during comfortable and fast walking.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: The biomechanical effects of foot orthoses (FOs) with and without a lateral bar compared to a control condition during walking at different speeds are still unknown. The objective of this study was to compare the biomechanical effects of functional FOs with and without a lateral bar to a control condition during comfortable walking in individuals with cavus feet and determine if their effects change at a fast speed. METHODS: Fifteen individuals with cavus feet (age: 25.3 ± 5.8 yrs) walked under two experimental conditions (FOs with and without a lateral bar) and a control condition (shoes only) at comfortable (CW) and fast (FW) speeds. The outcome measures were ankle and knee angles and gluteus medius, vastus lateralis, gastrocnemius lateralis, gastrocnemius medialis, peroneus longus and tibialis anterior electromyography (EMG) amplitudes during the stance phase of walking and were compared between the FOs and a control condition using one-dimensional statistical parametric mapping. RESULTS: During CW, both FOs decreased ankle dorsiflexion and increased knee extension angles compared to no FOs. FOs with a lateral bar also decreased peroneus longus EMG amplitudes. During FW, FOs with and without a lateral bar decreased ankle dorsiflexion angles compared to no FOs. CONCLUSION: Both types of FOs had different effects on the biomechanics of the lower limb compared to a control condition. The decreased peroneus longus EMG amplitudes during CW in individuals with cavus feet could have important clinical implications in other populations, such as individuals with painful cavus feet. The orthoses only affected the ankle dorsiflexion angles at a fast speed and no EMG amplitude or knee kinematics effects were observed. Further studies assessing the ankle kinematics and kinetics effects of these orthoses are needed to improve our understanding of their mechanism of action and inform future efficacy trials.

The Cavovarus Ankle: Approaches to Ankle Instability and Inframalleolar Deformity.

Pathologic affects from a cavus foot deformity range from flexible subtle to rigid severe deformities and are related to many pathologic conditions of the foot and ankle. Understanding the underlying deformity and the deforming force is essential in treating the cavus ankle and foot. Every deformity is different and unique to a given patient; therefore, surgical plans should be modified to each patient.

Foot Posture and Plantar Loading With Ankle Bracing.

CONTEXT: Arch height is one important aspect of foot posture. An estimated 20% of the population has pes planus and 20% has pes cavus. These abnormal foot postures can alter lower extremity kinematics and plantar loading and contribute to injury risk. Ankle bracing is commonly used in sport to prevent these injuries, but no researchers have examined the effects of ankle bracing on plantar loading. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of ankle braces on plantar loading during athletic tasks. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Laboratory. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: A total of 36 participants (11 men, 25 women; age = 23.1 ± 2.5 years, height = 1.72 ± 0.09 m, mass = 66.3 ± 14.7 kg) were recruited for this study. INTERVENTION(S): Participants completed walking, running, and cutting tasks in 3 bracing conditions: no brace, lace-up ankle-support brace, and semirigid brace. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): We analyzed the plantar-loading variables of contact area, maximum force, and force-time integral for 2 midfoot and 3 forefoot regions and assessed the displacement of the center of pressure. A 3 × 3 mixed-model repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to determine the effects of brace and foot type (α = .05). RESULTS: Foot type affected force measures in the middle (P range = .003-.047) and the medial side of the foot (P range = .004-.04) in all tasks. Brace type affected contact area in the medial midfoot during walking (P = .005) and cutting (P = .01) tasks, maximum force in the medial and lateral midfoot during all tasks (P < .001), and force-time integral in the medial midfoot during all tasks (P < .001). Portions of the center-of-pressure displacement were affected by brace wear in both the medial-lateral and anterior-posterior directions (P range = .001-.049). CONCLUSIONS: Ankle braces can be worn to redistribute plantar loading. Additional research should be done to evaluate their effectiveness in injury prevention.

Cavus Foot: Deciding Between Osteotomy and Arthrodesis.

Mild to moderate cavus deformity creates a dilemma in terms of surgical decision-making. The decision to pursue osteotomy or arthrodesis is not always clear. This article provides a framework for guiding management of these deformities, followed by a detailed surgical approach to correcting moderate cavus deformities, which emphasizes the use of a midfoot osteotomy-arthrodesis.

Failure of Surgical Treatment in Patients with Cavovarus Deformity: Why Does This Happen and How Do We Approach Treatment?

Recurrent deformity after surgical treatment of the cavus foot occurs because a procedure is not performed at the apex of the deformity. In many instances there are multiple apices and, in addition to hindfoot osteotomy or arthrodesis, the midfoot must be corrected. There is not much of a role for the Coleman block test to determine flexibility of the foot, and this has led to many failures where the foot was believed flexible and an osteotomy was insufficient treatment. Skeletal correction, even if perfect, does not last unless the foot is balanced with appropriate tendon transfers.

Segmental foot and ankle kinematic differences between rectus, planus, and cavus foot types.

The presence of multiple foot types has been used to explain the variability of foot structure observed among healthy adults. These foot types were determined by specific static morphologic features and included rectus (well aligned hindfoot/forefoot), planus (low arched), and cavus (high arched) foot types. Unique biomechanical characteristics of these foot types have been identified but reported differences in segmental foot kinematics among them has been inconsistent due to differences in neutral referencing and evaluation of only select discrete variables. This study used the radiographically-indexed Milwaukee Foot Model to evaluate differences in segmental foot kinematics among healthy adults with rectus, planus, and cavus feet based on the true bony alignment between segments. Based on the definitions of the individual foot types and due to conflicting results in previous literature, the primary study outcome was peak coronal hindfoot position during stance phase. Additionally, locally weighted regression smoothing with alpha-adjusted serial t-test analysis (LAAST) was used to compare these foot types across the entire gait cycle. Average peak hindfoot inversion was -1.6° ± 5.1°, 6.7° ± 3.5°, and 13.6° ± 4.6°, for the Planus, Rectus, and Cavus Groups, respectively. There were significant differences among all comparisons. Differences were observed between the Rectus and Planus Groups and Cavus and Planus Groups throughout the gait cycle. Additionally, the Planus Group had a premature peak velocity toward coronal varus and early transition toward valgus, likely due to a deficient windlass mechanism. This assessment of kinematic data across the gait cycle can help understand differences in dynamic foot function among foot types.

Clinical Examination and Radiographic Assessment of the Cavus Foot.

The purpose of the clinical examination is to detect subtle cavus or cavovarus deformity, assess the severity and type of deformity, differentiate between idiopathic versus secondary etiologies of cavus foot deformity, and evaluate for other associated abnormalities. The clinical examination should begin with a gait analysis. The neurologic examination reveals peripheral neuropathy or central nervous system etiology for the foot deformity. On plain radiographs, forefoot-driven deformity can be assessed using the Meary angle, and hindfoot-driven deformity can be measured by the calcaneal pitch. Computed tomography and MRI scans can assess for tarsal coalitions and soft tissue pathologies, respectively.

Updates in Pediatric Cavovarus Deformity.

The treatment goal for pediatric cavovarus deformities is to neutralize plantar pressure distribution, reduce hindfoot varus deformity, and avoid or postpone ankle, midfoot, and hindfoot arthritis. If nonoperative treatment is not sufficient, surgical realignment must be discussed. Promising improvements in decision making and operative techniques have been published. To avoid disappointment owing to recurrence or failures of operative procedures, selection of the appropriate and preferably single operative procedure remains the most crucial factor for success. This article focuses on current treatment options depending on the localization of the anatomic pathology. Outcomes of nonoperative and operative treatments are presented.