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.
CONCLUSIONS: 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.

BACKGROUND: Tarsometatarsal (TMT) arthrodesis is commonly performed in the management of midfoot arthritis, trauma, or deformity. The purpose of this study was to collect aggregate data (demographic, surgical, and perioperative outcomes) on patients who previously had a TMT fusion with BME compression staples.
METHODS: Sixty-six patients underwent TMT fusion with BME compression staples. Outcomes included demographics, surgical information, the Veterans Rand VR-12 Health Survey, Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM), visual analog scale (VAS), Revised-Foot Function Index (FFI-R), Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale (AOS), patient satisfaction survey scores, radiographic fusion rate, level of pain reduction, and complications. Sixty-six patients (68 feet) were analyzed (59 females) with an average age of 64 years (range, 18-83). The mean latest follow-up was 35.9 (range, 6-56.6 months).
RESULTS: The average surgical time was 38.1±14.3 minutes (range, 11-75). All outcomes improved significantly (P < .001) from preoperative to latest follow-up except for the VR-12 Mental and Physical score. The average time to fusion determined by radiographs was 8.4 weeks (range, 6.1-46.1 weeks). Wound complications were not seen. Indications for subsequent surgeries (26.5%, 18/68 feet) in this current study included pain (n = 14), broken staples, and nonunion (n = 3).
CONCLUSIONS: The fusion rate in this study, 89.7%, was similar to values reported in the literature. The patient satisfaction score of 81.9 at latest follow-up is consistent with patient satisfaction for other methods of fusion.
METHODS: Level IV, retrospective case series.

BACKGROUND: First tarsometatarsal (TMT) joint fusion is effective for treatment of arthritis and some first ray deformities. To prepare the articular surfaces, cartilage should be carefully but completely denuded. Inadequate preparation may result in non-union, while excessive preparation may cause ray shortening and consequential transfer metatarsalgia. Preparation can be performed with an osteotome or a saw. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether utilization of an osteotome or saw would minimize shortening of the first ray in TMT arthrodesis.
METHODS: Ten fresh-frozen cadaver specimens were randomly assigned to undergo joint preparation using either an osteotome (n=5) or saw (n=5). Sample size was determined by cadaver availability. Fusion was performed using a cross-screw construct through the dorsal aspect of the proximal phalanx and the medial cuneiform. Pre- and post-operative X-rays were taken with a radiopaque ruler in the field, and changes in length in the first metatarsal and first cuneiform were compared between osteotome and sawblade groups.
RESULTS: The average change in metatarsal length was significantly smaller in the osteotome group (1.6mm) as compared to the saw group (4.4mm) (p=0.031). The average percent change in metatarsal length was also significantly smaller in the osteotome group (3.0%) compared to the saw group (8.4%) (p=0.025). There was no significant difference between the two groups with respect to change in cuneiform length. The osteotome group demonstrated a significantly smaller average measured change (3.0mm vs. 6.9mm, p=0.001) and percent change (4.1% vs. 9.3%, p<0.001) in total length (cuneiform plus metatarsal) in comparison to the saw group.
CONCLUSIONS: In first TMT fusion, joint preparation with an osteotome may prevent over-shortening of the first ray in comparison to preparation with a saw.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists regarding optimal primary management of Lisfranc injuries. Whether open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) or primary arthrodesis is superior remains unknown.
METHODS: A national insurance database of approximately 23.5 million orthopedic patients was retrospectively queried for subjects who were diagnosed with a Lisfranc injury from 2007 to 2016 based on international classification of diseases (ICD) codes (PearlDiver, Colorado Springs, CO). Patients with lisfranc injuries then progressed to either nonoperative treatment, ORIF, or primary arthrodesis. Associated treatment costs were determined along with complication rate and hardware removal rate.
RESULTS: 2205 subjects with a diagnosis of Lisfranc injury were identified in the database. 1248 patients underwent nonoperative management, 670 underwent ORIF, and 212 underwent primary arthrodesis. The average cost of care associated with primary arthrodesis was greater ($5005.82) than for ORIF ($3961.97,P = 0.045). The overall complication rate was 23.1% (155/670) for ORIF and 30.2% (64/212) for primary arthrodesis (P = 0.04). Rates of hardware removal were 43.6% (292/670) for ORIF and 18.4% (39/212) for arthrodesis (P < 0.001). Furthermore, 2.5% (17/670) patients in the ORIF group progressed to arthrodesis at a mean of 308 days, average cost of care associated with this group of patients was $9505.12.
CONCLUSIONS: Primary arthrodesis is both significantly more expensive and has a higher complication rate than ORIF. Open reduction and internal fixation demonstrated a low rate of progression to arthrodesis, although there was a high rate of hardware removal, which may represent a planned second procedure in the management of a substantial number of patients treated with ORIF.
METHODS: Level III Retrospective Cohort Study.

Moderate to severe hallux valgus (HV) has traditionally been treated with a corrective osteotomy or a tarsometatarsal arthrodesis. Tarsometatarsal arthrodesis can be performed as a planar wedge resection or using a joint curettage technique. Little is known about whether adequate correction can be obtained with purely a joint curettage technique. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the corrective power of a first tarsometatarsal joint (TMTJ) arthrodesis using a nonplanar wedge curettage technique. A retrospective radiograph and chart review was performed on 99 consecutive patients (110 feet) who underwent a first TMTJ arthrodesis for primary HV correction utilizing a curettage technique. The radiographic measurements collected were the first intermetatarsal angle, HV angle, and tibial sesamoid position and were obtained at the following intervals: preoperative, immediate postoperative, and 6 months postoperative. In all, 91 patients (100 feet) qualified for statistical analysis. There was a significant decrease in all 3 measurements from the preoperative throughout the entire postoperative time period (P < .001). The authors demonstrate the ability to achieve significant angular correction with a joint curettage method for a tarsometatarsal arthrodesis.
METHODS: Therapeutic, Level IV: Case series.