Modifiye lapidus prosedürünün uzun dönem sonuçları

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 2, 18 - 22, 21.03.2020

Mehmet Orçun Akkurt

https://doi.org/10.18663/tjcl.689886

Öz

Amaç: Çalışmamızda 2004-2012 yılları arasında Modifye Lapidus prosedürü uyguladığımız 67 hastayı restrospektif olarak değerlendirdik.
Gereç ve Yöntemler: Hastaların 61’I Kadın,6’sı erkekti. Hastaların ortalama yaşı 51’di .Hastaların ortalama takip süresi yaklaşık 10yıl’dı (6-14 yıl). Hastaların klinik muayenesiyle birlikte ameliyat öncesi ,ameliyat sonrası en son takipte basarak çekilmiş ayak grafileri alınmıştır.Bu grafilerde intermetatarsal açı (İMA),halluks abduktus açısı (HAV) ve tibial sesamoid pozisyonu (TSP) değerlendirildi.
Bulgular: Hastalarımızda İMA ve HAA’da sırasıyla 9.6⁰ ve 21.4⁰ ortalama düzelme sağlandı. İMA ve HAA’da ameliyat öncesi ve ameliyat sonrası radyografilerde istatiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark mevcuttu (p<0.001).Kaynamama nedeniyle revize ettiğimiz bir hastamız hariç hiçbirisinde greft kullanmadık.Komplikasyon olarak 4 hastamızda kaynamama,2 hastamızda kaynamama,3 hastamızda intraoperative kılavuz teli kırılması,2 hastamızda vida kırılması,5 hastamızda yüzeysel enfeksiyon,1 hastamızda FHL rüptürüyle karşılaştık.Takiplerde hiçbir hastamızda halluks valgus rekürrensiyle karşılaşmadık.
Sonuç: Biz Modifiye Lapidus artrodezi 1. sıra hipermobilitesiyle birlikte olan halluks valguslarda ve ciddi halluks valguslarda kullanabileceğimiz ve kuvvetli düzeltme sağlayabileceğimiz bir prosedür olduğu kanaatine vardık.

Anahtar Kelimeler

halluks valgus, lapidus, hipermobilite, 1st tarsometatarsal artrodez

Destekleyen Kurum

yok

Proje Numarası

72300690-799

Teşekkür

Prof. Dr. Ali Öznur

Long term results of modified lapidus procedure

Öz

Aim: In this study we presented a review of 67 Modified Lapidus procedure performed between 2004 and 2012.
Material and Methods: There were 61 females and 6 males. The mean age of patients was 51 years. The average follow-up was 10 years (6-14 years).The patients were evaluated preoperatively,postoperatively and last follow up using standard weight bearing radiographs and clinical examination.The radiographs were evaluated for intermetatarsal angle (IMA),hallux abductus angle (HAA) and tibial sesamoid position (TSP).
Results: The mean improvement at IMA and HAA was respectively 9.6⁰ and 21.4⁰.There was statically significant difference at IMA and HAA preoperatively and postoperatively (p<0.001).We didn’t use graft for any patients except one patient which was revised for nonunion.Complications include delayed union (n=4),nonunion (2),intraoperative guide wire breakage (n=3),screw breakage (n=2),superficial infection (n=5),FHL rupture (n=1).There were no recurrences of hallux valgus at follow up.
Conclusion: Modified Lapidus procedure is both a predictable and durable procedure for the powerful correction for severe hallux valgus and first ray hypermobility. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

hallux valgus, lapidus, hypermobility, 1st tarsometatarsal arthrodesis

Proje Numarası

72300690-799

Kaynakça

• 1.Albrecht GH: The pathology and treatment of hallux valgus. Russ Vrach 10:14, 1911
• 2.Lapidus PW. The operative correction of the metatarsus primus varus in hallux valgus. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1934; 58: 183-91
• 3.Clark HR, Veith RG, Hansen ST Jr. Adolescent bunions treated by the modified Lapidus Procedure. Bull Hosp Joint Dis Ortho Inst 1987; 47: 109–22.
• 4.Bednarz PA, Manoli A II. Modified Lapidus procedure for the treatment of hypermobile hallux valgus. Foot Ankle Int 2000; 21: 816–21.
• 5.Faber FW, Mulder PG, Verhaar JA. Role of first ray hypermobility in the outcome of the Hohman and the Lapidus procedure: a prospective, randomized trial involving one hundred and one feet. J Bone Joint Surg 2004; 86: 486–95.
• 6.Bacardi BE, Boysen TJ. Considerations for the lapidus operation. J Foot Surg 25:133–138,
• 7.Sangeorzan BJ, Hansen ST. Modified Lapidus procedure for hallux valgus. Foot Ankle 1986; 9: 262–66.
• 8.Saffo G, Wooster MF, Stevens M, Desnoyers R, Catanzariti AR. First metatarsocuneiform joint arthrodesis: a five-year retrospective analysis. J Foot Surg 1989; 28: 459–65.
• 9.McInnes BD, Bouché RT. Critical evaluation of the modified Lapidus procedure. J Foot Ankle Surg 2001; 40: 71-90.
• 10.Thompson IM, Bohay DR, Anderson JG. Fusion rate of first tarsometatarsal arthrodesis in the modified Lapidus procedure and flatfoot reconstruction. Foot Ankle Int 2005; 26: 698-703.
• 11.Kopp FJ, Patel MM, Levine DS, Deland JT. The modified Lapidus procedure for hallux valgus: a clinical and radiographic analysis. Foot Ankle Int 2005; 26: 913-17.
• 12.Patel S, Ford LA, Etcheverry J, Rush SM, Hamilton GA. Modified lapidus arthrodesis: rate of nonunion in 227 cases. J Foot Ankle Surg 2004; 43: 37–42.
• 13.Johnson JT, Schuberth JM, Thornton SD, Christensen JC. Joint curettage arthrodesis technique in the foot: a histological analysis.J Foot Ankle Surg 2009; 48: 558-64.
• 14. Myerson M, Allon S, McGarvey W. Metatarsocuneiform arthrodesis for management of hallux valgus and metatarsus primus varus. Foot Ankle 1992; 13: 107–15.
• 15.Klos K,Gueroguiev B,Muckley T,Fröber R,Hofmann GO,Schwieger G,Windolf M. Stability of medial locking plate and compression screw versus two crossed screws for lapidus arthrodesis. Foot Ankle Int 2010; 31: 158-63
• 16. King CM, Richey J,Patel S,Collman DR. Modified lapidus arthrodesis with crossed screw fixation: early weightbearing in 136 patients. J Foot Ankle Surg 2015; 54: 69-75.
• 17. Blitz NM,Lee T,Williams K,Barkan H,DiDimenico LA. Early weight bearing after modified lapidus arthodesis: a multicenter review of 80 cases. J Foot Ankle Surg 2010; 49: 357-62.