BACKGROUND: The aim of this article is to provide an evidence-based literature review and assessment of the quality of literature regarding operative interventions for hallux rigidus. METHODS: A comprehensive evidence-based literature review of the PubMed database was conducted on June 24, 2011, identifying 586 articles, of which 135 were relevant in assessing the efficacy of common operative interventions for hallux rigidus. The 135 studies were then assigned a level of evidence (I-V) to denote quality. They were then reviewed to provide a grade of recommendation (A-C, I) in support of or against the operative intervention in treatment of hallux rigidus. RESULTS: Based on the results of this evidence-based review, there is fair evidence (grade B) in support of arthrodesis for treatment of hallux rigidus. There is poor evidence (grade C) in support of cheilectomy, osteotomy, implant arthroplasty, resection arthroplasty, and interpositional arthroplasty for treatment of hallux rigidus. There is insufficient evidence (grade I) for cheilectomy with osteotomy for treatment of hallux rigidus. CONCLUSION: There are no consistent findings in comparative studies that are properly powered with validated and appropriate outcome measures to allow any definitive conclusions on which procedure is best. However, the grade B recommendation assigned to arthrodesis may make it the logical leading candidate for future high-quality randomized controlled trials. Clearly, further studies-ideally, high-quality Level I randomized controlled trials with validated outcome measures-are needed to allow stronger recommendations to be made. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, systematic review.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this article is to provide an evidence-based literature review and assessment of the quality of literature regarding operative interventions for hallux rigidus. METHODS: A comprehensive evidence-based literature review of the PubMed database was conducted on June 24, 2011, identifying 586 articles, of which 135 were relevant in assessing the efficacy of common operative interventions for hallux rigidus. The 135 studies were then assigned a level of evidence (I-V) to denote quality. They were then reviewed to provide a grade of recommendation (A-C, I) in support of or against the operative intervention in treatment of hallux rigidus. RESULTS: Based on the results of this evidence-based review, there is fair evidence (grade B) in support of arthrodesis for treatment of hallux rigidus. There is poor evidence (grade C) in support of cheilectomy, osteotomy, implant arthroplasty, resection arthroplasty, and interpositional arthroplasty for treatment of hallux rigidus. There is insufficient evidence (grade I) for cheilectomy with osteotomy for treatment of hallux rigidus. CONCLUSION: There are no consistent findings in comparative studies that are properly powered with validated and appropriate outcome measures to allow any definitive conclusions on which procedure is best. However, the grade B recommendation assigned to arthrodesis may make it the logical leading candidate for future high-quality randomized controlled trials. Clearly, further studies-ideally, high-quality Level I randomized controlled trials with validated outcome measures-are needed to allow stronger recommendations to be made. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, systematic review.
Authors: Jason S Kim; Annunziato Amendola; Alexej Barg; Judith Baumhauer; James W Brodsky; Daniel M Cushman; Tyler A Gonzalez; Dennis Janisse; Michael J Jurynec; J Lawrence Marsh; Carolyn M Sofka; Thomas O Clanton; Donald D Anderson Journal: Foot Ankle Orthop Date: 2022-10-14