Lapidus Arthrodesis for Correction of Hallux Valgus Deformity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare different fixation methods to achieve Tarsometatarsal joint I (TMT-1) arthrodesis in patients with hallux valgus regarding radiographic correction, complication profile, and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis included primary literature results of evidence level 1 to 3 studies in German and English. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were established and applied, along with parameters suitable for comparison of data.

RESULTS

16 studies with a total of 1176 participants met the inclusion criteria for this analysis. Twelve evaluation criteria were compared among 3 fixation techniques; comprised of a screw-only, dorsomedial plating- and plantar plating cohort. There was no statistical difference in deformity correction (both intermetatarsal- and hallux valgus angle), or AOFAS score between the cohorts. The complication rate was 13% in the plantar-, 19.5% in the dorsomedial-, and 24.5% in the screw cohort. Nonunion was seen in 0.7% of participants in the plantar, 1.4% in the dorsomedial, and 5.3% in the screw group. The time until complete weightbearing correlated positively with the development of nonunion, with a coefficient of 0.376 (P = .009). Hardware removal was performed in 11.8% of patients in the dorsomedial cohort, 7.7% in the screw cohort, and 3.6% in the plantar cohort.

CONCLUSION

Based on the results of meta-analysis of heterogeneous studies, plantar plating facilitated early weightbearing and patient mobilization compared to the other fixation methods, while carrying the lowest nonunion, hardware removal, and general complication risk. However, owing to the relatively small number of patients in the plantar plating group, more work is necessary to elucidate the benefits of plantar plating for a first tarsometatarsal joint arthrodesis. Development of complications appears to be largely dependent on the fixation model, rather than patient mobilization alone.Level of Evidence: 3.