BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can cause significant forefoot disorders. If forefoot deformity and pain are severe, surgical treatment can be considered. The aim of this study was to analyze the long-term outcomes of surgical forefoot correction per Tillmann, which involves resection of the metatarsal heads through a transverse plantar approach for the lesser toes and a dorsomedial approach to the great toe. METHODS: This retrospective study used patient-based questionnaires to analyze the revision rate, pain, use of orthoses, walking ability, forefoot function, and patient satisfaction of patients with RA who had undergone a complete forefoot correction of metatarsophalangeal (MTP) I to V. The study only included participants with RA before the era of biological agents and who were at least 20 years postoperatively. A total of 60 patients who had undergone 100 complete forefoot operations according to Tillmann 24.6 ± 3.5 years ago were included in this study. RESULTS: The data collected showed that 35 reoperations were performed on 26 of the patients. Deformity relapses were often documented for the hallux valgus. More than 60% of the patients were able to wear conventional shoes. The distances the participants were able to walk were significantly increased by wearing shoes when compared with walking barefoot (P < .01). CONCLUSION: While forefoot function remained difficult to assess, the majority of patients were able to use conventional shoes. This long-term follow-up study of patient-reported questionnaires completed more than 20 years after the Tillmann procedure showed that more than 80% of the patients remained satisfied with the outcome. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, retrospective cohort study.
BACKGROUND: Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can cause significant forefoot disorders. If forefoot deformity and pain are severe, surgical treatment can be considered. The aim of this study was to analyze the long-term outcomes of surgical forefoot correction per Tillmann, which involves resection of the metatarsal heads through a transverse plantar approach for the lesser toes and a dorsomedial approach to the great toe. METHODS: This retrospective study used patient-based questionnaires to analyze the revision rate, pain, use of orthoses, walking ability, forefoot function, and patient satisfaction of patients with RA who had undergone a complete forefoot correction of metatarsophalangeal (MTP) I to V. The study only included participants with RA before the era of biological agents and who were at least 20 years postoperatively. A total of 60 patients who had undergone 100 complete forefoot operations according to Tillmann 24.6 ± 3.5 years ago were included in this study. RESULTS: The data collected showed that 35 reoperations were performed on 26 of the patients. Deformity relapses were often documented for the hallux valgus. More than 60% of the patients were able to wear conventional shoes. The distances the participants were able to walk were significantly increased by wearing shoes when compared with walking barefoot (P < .01). CONCLUSION: While forefoot function remained difficult to assess, the majority of patients were able to use conventional shoes. This long-term follow-up study of patient-reported questionnaires completed more than 20 years after the Tillmann procedure showed that more than 80% of the patients remained satisfied with the outcome. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, retrospective cohort study.
Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a disease with an inflammatory process of the synovial
membrane in joints, tenosynovial sheaths, and bursae. Despite major improvements in
drug therapy over the last decades,[9,17] the inflammatory process can
lead to severe destruction of joints, causing substantial deformities, particularly
if the drug therapy fails.[10] Tendons can deteriorate or even rupture and cause a loss of function.[26] Additionally, the bursae below the metatarsal heads are often severely
inflamed and painful with pronounced swelling. This inflammatory and destructive
process is often simultaneously found in all 3 parts of the foot.[21] Thus, patients with RA and a failure of antirheumatism medication
(disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs [DMARDs]) can have a significant forefoot
deformity with pain, and loss of mobility and function. Such patients will likely
need to wear orthopedic shoes as normal shoes can no longer be tolerated.[28]In order to correct the deformity and reduce pain, several surgical techniques have
been used over the last decades, including arthrodesis.[4,13,15,20,27,28] One method commonly used is
the Clayton-Hoffmann technique on the lesser toes, which is often concurrently used
with a fusion of the first metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint.[8] Another method is a complete forefoot correction according to Tillmann, which
is the standard procedure at the authors’ institution for such forefoot disorders
and which is a well-described procedure by Karl Tillmann.[6,29,31,32] The operation includes a
Hueter-Mayo procedure with a dorsomedial approach for the hallux valgus (HV) and a
plantar approach to the lesser toes for resection of the metatarsal heads with some
particular modifications.[29] The main goal of this surgical treatment is to reduce forefoot pain, increase
the ability to wear conventional shoes, and maintain forefoot function.[29,30]This study analyzes data from patients with RA with severe forefoot deformities who,
before the era of biological treatment, underwent a complete forefoot correction per
Tillmann. The study only included participants who were at least 20 years
postoperatively.
Methods
Surgical Procedure
Complete forefoot arthroplasty as described by Tillmann of the rheumatoid foot
includes a modification of the resection arthroplasty of the MTP I joint by Hueter[15] and Mayo,[20,32] in combination with a modified resection arthroplasty of
MTP joints II to V according to Hoffmann.[13,31] Tillmann’s forefoot
arthroplasty consists of a metatarsal head resection from a plantar approach,
plantar capsulorrhaphy, tenolysis, and rerouting of the tendons. For the MTP I
joint, a dorsomedial approach is used, before a sparse metatarsal head resection
adjusted to the length of the second MTP joint is performed to create the proper
position of the first digit. If needed for alignment and length adjustments,
Tillmann recommends adding a resection of the proximal phalangeal base.
Furthermore, the sesamoids are resected (Figure 1). After resection, the reshaped
metatarsal head is covered by a dorsal capsular flap including the short
extensor tendon. Arthroplasty of MTP joints II to V requires a transverse
plantar approach using an elliptical excision of skin calluses and subcutaneous
tissue including bursae. The distal aspect of the plantar incision curves in
line with the natural metatarsal head cascade. The proximal incision is created
to adequately excise any plantar calluses but may be irregularly shaped in order
to maximize the length of the flap.
Figure 1.
Pre- and postoperative radiographs demonstrating a forefoot. (A) The
preoperative radiograph shows a severe forefoot deformity with hallux
valgus and subluxation of the lesser toes, particularly digits 2 and 3.
(B) The postoperative radiograph was taken in the operation room
immediately after the Tillmann procedure and shows a corrective elastic
dressing with a slightly intended overcorrection of the first digit for
the first days. The arrows point to the resected metatarsal areas. The
metatarsal head of digit 1 shows a sparse resection and anatomic
position. The sesamoid bones are resected. Furthermore, it illustrates
the resected metatarsal heads of digits 2 to 5 with length adjustments.
The latter radiograph of the forefoot was taken with wound dressings
including a radiopaque marker along digit 1.
Pre- and postoperative radiographs demonstrating a forefoot. (A) The
preoperative radiograph shows a severe forefoot deformity with hallux
valgus and subluxation of the lesser toes, particularly digits 2 and 3.
(B) The postoperative radiograph was taken in the operation room
immediately after the Tillmann procedure and shows a corrective elastic
dressing with a slightly intended overcorrection of the first digit for
the first days. The arrows point to the resected metatarsal areas. The
metatarsal head of digit 1 shows a sparse resection and anatomic
position. The sesamoid bones are resected. Furthermore, it illustrates
the resected metatarsal heads of digits 2 to 5 with length adjustments.
The latter radiograph of the forefoot was taken with wound dressings
including a radiopaque marker along digit 1.Resection of the metatarsal heads is performed with correct alignment and length
relative to each other, allowing correction of deformity and soft tissue
contractures. The metatarsal stumps are rounded off, and the plantar capsule is
then tightened. Thereafter, plantar tibial tightening of the capsule of the
lesser toes is performed for additional alignment positioning. For lasting
correction and good mobility, the arthroplasty needs to resist elastic
distraction of 6 to 8 mm between the remodeled metatarsal heads and the proximal
phalanges without losing the suture fixation and correction. In cases of flexion
contractures of the proximal or more seldomly of the distal interphalangeal
joints, manipulation of the contracted joints is often needed; sometimes,
temporary Kirschner wire fixation is needed to preserve alignment.[28,29,32]
Patients
To be accepted into this study, patients had to have RA and had to have undergone
a complete forefoot correction according to Tillmann due to a severe forefoot
disorder before January 1, 1995. From the hospital database and according to the
inclusion criteria, 234 patients were eligible to be included in the
retrospective study (Figure
1). Data from 165 patients were archived in the electronic database.
The data from 69 patients had to be assessed in film archives. Eighteen patients
had to be excluded due to lack of files. Contact details for the remaining 216
patients were provided by the registration office. Of the 216 patients, 78 had
already died. Letters enclosing a patient-based questionnaire were therefore
sent out to 138 eligible participants. Of those 138 eligible participants, 46
did not want to participate in the study and 32 others were no longer at their
registered address and consequently were untraceable for the purposes of this
study. Ultimately, a total of 60 patients who had collectively undergone 100
forefoot operations agreed to participate in the study and returned the
completed questionnaire. All patients were offered an appointment for a
follow-up visit. However, none of the patients accepted this offer.After applying the inclusion criteria and identifying participant locations, 60
patients who had undergone 100 forefoot reconstructions according to Tillmann
had returned the questionnaire (Figure 2). Most of the participants were female (58 vs 2 male). On 7
occasions, only the left foot was operated on, while in 13 cases only the right
foot was operated on. In 40 cases, both feet underwent surgery. The average age
of the patient when the forefoot operation was carried out was 48.9 ± 8.7 years.
The average age of those completing the follow-up questionnaire was 72.6 ± 8.3
years. All participants had a minimum follow-up time of 20 years
postoperatively, averaging a total of 24.6 ± 3.5 years.
Figure 2.
The flowchart illustrates the number of patients who had the forefoot
operation (n = 234), the dropout reasons (eg, no records in archive,
deceased, etc), and the total number of patients included in the current
study (n = 60).
The flowchart illustrates the number of patients who had the forefoot
operation (n = 234), the dropout reasons (eg, no records in archive,
deceased, etc), and the total number of patients included in the current
study (n = 60).
Questionnaire
The patient-based questionnaire was a self-constructed RA- and forefoot-specific
outcome instrument that covered 6 survey areas: revision surgery, pain, use of
orthoses, walking ability, foot function, and satisfaction with surgery
(Appendix A). Secondary outcome parameters were the development
of recurrent deformities such as hammertoes and HV, as well as plantar
callosities. Information on revision surgery was based on information provided
by the participant in the questionnaire, and the participant’s health records
for the revision surgery, if available. Pain was measured on a nominal scale
consisting of 3 categories: no pain, pain under strain, and rest pain.
Participants were asked about their use of orthoses, particularly whether
conventional shoes with or without modifications by shoemakers, custom-made
orthopedic shoes, insoles, or toe pads were used in their daily life. For
measurements of walking ability, participants were asked about their walking
distance with and without shoes on a 4-point rating scale from “not at all” to
“over 100 meters.” Foot function and balance were measured via the ability to
perform a 2-legged tiptoe stand, a plantar 1-legged stand, and a 1-legged tiptoe
stand for 5 seconds each. Deformity recurrence for HV, hammertoes, and plantar
swelling was evaluated by each patient based on photographic examples given in
the questionnaire. At the end of the survey, patient satisfaction was measured
with a 4-point Likert scale.The study was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki of 1975,
as revised in 2000, and with ethical approval obtained from the local ethics
committee of the Hamburg Medical Association. All participants in the study gave
written informed consent.
Statistical Analysis
Statistical analysis was performed using the statistics package SPSS version 23.0
(IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). The values of descriptive statistics are expressed by
means with a standard deviation (SD) as well as frequencies and percentages for
nominal data. The Kendall rank correlation coefficient
(r) was used to test the association between
pain, recurrence deformities, and patient satisfaction. The Wilcoxon signed rank
test for nonparametric data was applied to measure the difference between the
barefoot walking distance and the walking distance with shoes. In accordance
with accepted standards, statistical significance was set to a 2-tailed
P value of .05.
Results
For 35% of the participants, no forefoot pain was present at the time they completed
the follow-up questionnaire (Supplemental Figure 1). In approximately 40% of cases (23
participants), pain under strain was recorded. Approximately 23% of participants had
pain at rest (2 patients declined to answer). Pain medication (eg, NSAIDs) was
regularly taken by one-third of the participants.Patients were asked whether they wear conventional shoes, conventional shoe wear
modified by the shoemaker, custom-made orthopedic shoes, insoles, or toe pads. As
multiple answers were possible, an average of 2.2 ± 0.97 combinations of orthoses
were used in 60 patients. Furthermore, due to multiple selections and an individual
emphasis for each category, each orthosis category was analyzed and demonstrated
separately (Figure 3).
Thirty-four patients (56.7%) were able to wear conventional shoes. Upon questioning,
15 patients (25%) declared using conventional shoe wear with minor modifications.
Custom-made orthopedic shoes were worn by about one-third (22 patients, 36.7%) of
the questioned participants. Many patients required additional orthoses like toe
pads (11 patients, 18.3%) or insoles (47 patients, 78.3%). The use of proper
footwear is essential for most patients to increase their mobility (Figure 4). More than 68% of
participants were not able to walk unshod for more than 10 m. However, over 70% of
participants were able to walk more than 100 m while wearing shoes
(P < .001).
Figure 3.
Illustration showing the use of shoe wear (conventional shoes with or without
modifications by the shoemaker, custom-fabricated orthopedic shoes) and
other orthoses (insoles, toe pads). Multiple answer choices were possible.
Therefore, values reach more than 100% in total, as some patients require
different orthoses depending on the situation in the operated foot.
Figure 4.
Bar graphs demonstrating the percentage of patients able to walk a specified
distance (less than 2 m, 2-10 m, more than 10 m but less 100 m, and more
than 100 m) barefoot or with shoes. A reciprocal significance for barefoot
and shoed walking for a distance of more than 100 m is shown
(*P < .001).
Illustration showing the use of shoe wear (conventional shoes with or without
modifications by the shoemaker, custom-fabricated orthopedic shoes) and
other orthoses (insoles, toe pads). Multiple answer choices were possible.
Therefore, values reach more than 100% in total, as some patients require
different orthoses depending on the situation in the operated foot.Bar graphs demonstrating the percentage of patients able to walk a specified
distance (less than 2 m, 2-10 m, more than 10 m but less 100 m, and more
than 100 m) barefoot or with shoes. A reciprocal significance for barefoot
and shoed walking for a distance of more than 100 m is shown
(*P < .001).Functional outcomes were assessed with a 2-legged tiptoe stand, 1-legged tiptoe
stand, and, the most difficult task, a 1-legged tiptoe stand (Figure 5). Fifty percent of participants were
not able to perform the 2-legged tiptoe stand. However, more than a quarter of the
operated feet (26.7%) could hold the position for more than 5 seconds. The 1-legged
stand was possible in 60 operated feet (63.2%), but only 29 feet could bear the
position for more than 5 seconds (30.5%). The 1-legged tiptoe stand was the most
difficult position to perform, with only 18 operated feet being able to keep the
position for more than 5 seconds (18.4%). For the majority (64.3%), the 1-legged
tiptoe stand was not possible. Data for 5 feet are absent with regard to the
1-legged stand and for 2 feet for the 1-legged tiptoe stand.
Figure 5.
Forefoot function of the patients is demonstrated as a percentage via the
2-legged tiptoe stand, the 1-legged stand, and, the most advanced form, the
1-legged tiptoe stand. If patients were able to perform these stands, they
were asked to specify whether it was possible to hold the position for 1 to
5 seconds or longer.
Forefoot function of the patients is demonstrated as a percentage via the
2-legged tiptoe stand, the 1-legged stand, and, the most advanced form, the
1-legged tiptoe stand. If patients were able to perform these stands, they
were asked to specify whether it was possible to hold the position for 1 to
5 seconds or longer.There were no recurrences for hammertoes or plantar swelling in 64 and 65 feet (66.0%
and 68.4%), respectively (Figure
6A). Only 10 feet (10.3%) had a severe relapse of hammertoes, and only 8
feet (8.4%) had a severe relapse of plantar swelling. Recurrent HV was documented as
mild to moderate in 30 feet (31.25%), and severe in 29 feet (30.2%). Information is
lacking for 4 HV, 3 hammertoes, and 5 feet with plantar swelling.
Figure 6.
(A) Deformity relapses of the forefoot are demonstrated with bar graphs. No
significant differences are identified. However, the fewest deformity
relapses were documented for hammertoes and plantar swelling. Most mild and
severe deformity cases were seen for the hallux valgus (hallux valgus angle
20 to 40 degrees and more than 40 degrees, respectively). (B) Image
demonstrating a severe hallux valgus relapse with hammertoes for digits 4
and 5. (C) Table demonstrating the number of reoperations
(n = 35 feet) of the great toe (D1) and the lesser toes
(D2-D5), including their combinations in a total of 26 patients. Some
patients underwent a revision Hueter-Mayo procedure for the great toe
(n = 5), whereas 9 others had a metatarsophalangeal I
arthrodesis due to the relapse. The operations for the lesser toes are
separated according to whether they involved all 4 or fewer than 4 lesser
toes. The combinations of great and lesser toes (D1 and D2-D5) take into
account both previous groups.
(A) Deformity relapses of the forefoot are demonstrated with bar graphs. No
significant differences are identified. However, the fewest deformity
relapses were documented for hammertoes and plantar swelling. Most mild and
severe deformity cases were seen for the hallux valgus (hallux valgus angle
20 to 40 degrees and more than 40 degrees, respectively). (B) Image
demonstrating a severe hallux valgus relapse with hammertoes for digits 4
and 5. (C) Table demonstrating the number of reoperations
(n = 35 feet) of the great toe (D1) and the lesser toes
(D2-D5), including their combinations in a total of 26 patients. Some
patients underwent a revision Hueter-Mayo procedure for the great toe
(n = 5), whereas 9 others had a metatarsophalangeal I
arthrodesis due to the relapse. The operations for the lesser toes are
separated according to whether they involved all 4 or fewer than 4 lesser
toes. The combinations of great and lesser toes (D1 and D2-D5) take into
account both previous groups.A total of 35 reoperations (35%) were necessary in 26 patients (43.3%) (Figure 6C). Reoperations were
performed on average 10.5 ± 7.3 years after the primary operation. There were no
significant differences in terms of patient satisfaction, pain, orthosis use,
walking distances, or standing abilities in patients who had undergone reoperations,
when compared with patients who had not required secondary surgery. The only
significant difference recorded in the study was increased plantar swelling in cases
of reoperations (P < .05). Breakdown of the reoperations
demonstrated that the great toe needed it 14 times (revision Hueter-Mayo or MTP I
arthrodesis). The lesser toes required further surgical therapy in 21 cases. These
reoperations mostly addressed the remaining distal metatarsal bone
(n = 19) and, to a lesser extent, the surrounding soft tissue
(n = 6). Only 4 cases required a complete reoperation of the
entire forefoot.Twenty-five percent of the participants were very satisfied with the operation.
Fifty-nine percent (50 participants) were satisfied with the operation. Six percent
(4 participants) were not satisfied with the operation, and 10% (6 participants)
selected the category “dissatisfied” on the 4-point Likert scale (Supplemental Figure 1).
Discussion
With an average follow-up time of 24.6 years, this study of forefoot reconstructions
per Tillmann is the longest follow-up study of its kind. The main surgical aim of
the Tillmann procedure for RA-associated forefoot disorder is pain reduction,
regaining the ability to use conventional shoe wear, and maintaining the forefoot
function. Although joint protection and/or maintaining interventions are now more
frequently successful after the introduction of DMARD therapy, the metatarsal head
resection of the lesser toes II to V remains the gold standard therapy for the
severely deformed rheumatoid forefoot.[22] In contrast to the Tillmann procedure, the Stainsby operation uses a dorsal
approach with several longitudinal incisions.[27] Instead of resecting the metatarsal heads, the Stainsby operation resects the
base of the proximal phalanges and repositions the dislocated plantar plate beneath
the metatarsal heads.[1,3]
It has been reported that the Stainsby operation results in good satisfaction rates,
with 50% of participants in the study by Hassan et al being completely satisfied,
and 34% of participants being satisfied with some reservations, while 20% of the
participants still reported significant forefoot pain in a midterm follow-up of 32 months.[11] These respectable results were confirmed by other authors in short- to
midterm follow-up studies. For example, Dodd et al, Matthews et al, and Queally et
al concluded that the Stainsby operation provides effective pain relief, a reduction
of skin callosities, correction of claw toe deformations, and overall improved
forefoot function.[7,19,24] However, long-term studies for this dorsal approach are
currently not available.The plantar approach of Tillmann with resection of the metatarsal heads investigated
here might have a high revision rate of 35% but has an overall satisfactory outcome
of 84% for all patients. The surgical plantar approach was well tolerated, even 20
or more years after the operation.[29] The reoperations mainly addressed relapses for recurring HV and, to a lesser
extent, hammertoes or plantar callosities. Only minor bone issues (eg, edge
smoothening, resections) regarding the lesser toes had to be readdressed, similar to
previous evaluations by Tillmann himself.[29] Furthermore, the surgical procedures for HV and for the lesser toes have to
be assessed separately, as the deformity of the great toe appears to be the least
well-addressed part in the Tillmann procedure. Others, like Hassan et al, showed
similar problems in addressing the HV by osteotomy and soft tissue reconstruction.[11] Others, such as Bass et al and Kadambande et al, advocate strongly for a
primary arthrodesis of the MTP I joint due to increased stability of the MTP I joint
and weightbearing possibility plus increased protection of the lesser toes after
reconstructive surgery.[1,16] In contrast, others support a combined osteotomy and soft
tissue reconstruction and have had good results with that.[1,16,18] In the authors’ experience, a
mere osteotomy and soft tissue reconstruction should be limited to mild HV angles of
less than 40 degrees with good redressing intraoperatively. However, in cases of
severe joint deviations of 40 degrees or more of the HV angle, the authors suggest,
with regard to the current results, primary arthrodesis of the MTP I joint in order
to avoid deformity relapse. This opinion aligns with Bass et al and Whitt et al, who
used a primary fusion technique for all HV in forefoot deformity surgery.[1,34]The use of conventional shoes not only is important for patients but also is one of
the surgical goals. This follow-up study shows that only about one-third of
participants (36.7%) needed custom-made orthopedic shoes after the Tillmann forefoot
procedure. Often, the need for special shoes is significantly increased after an
operative correction of the rheumatoid forefoot. This happens especially after a
resection arthroplasty of the first MTP joint, where between 45% and 91% of patients
require special shoes.[5] In this study, the majority of patients (>60%) were able to wear
conventional shoe wear. Bitzan and his colleagues had more than 90% of patients
wearing ordinary shoes, but their follow-up was conducted only up to 90 months after surgery.[2] The ability to use a conventional shoe is important for patients’ quality of
life, as it significantly improves their walking distances compared with barefoot
walking.Postoperative pain improvement is also addressed by other procedures.[1,3,7,24] This follow-up study shows
that 35% of patients were pain-free while approximately 40% of patients had pain
under strain. This is most probably the limiting factor for the reduced barefoot
walking distances for the larger part of the group. Even Tillmann described pain
relief lasting only for a few years before the intensity increased again.[29] Therefore, the current results show even longer pain relief than expected.
Other groups with similar surgical techniques have demonstrated a higher percentage
of pain-free patients due to better plantar pressure distribution and deformity
correction,[2,33] but long-term follow-up results, such as those here, are not
available. Other groups recently demonstrated good outcomes for joint-preserving
arthroplasties similar to resection techniques, but likewise, long-term follow-ups
are lacking.[14,25,34] Nevertheless,
HV and the lesser toes have to be properly addressed and positioned with each
operative procedure in order to achieve long-term satisfactory outcomes.One of the less satisfactory outcomes after Tillmann’s forefoot surgery is decreased
forefoot function. Only a few patients were able to perform a 1-legged stand or even
a 1-legged tiptoe stand, the latter even being challenging for a healthy,
nonoperated patient. One reason may be progressive stiffness in the first MTP joint,
which was already identified by Tillmann.[29] He not only described its stiffness, but also documented an increase in
correction loss and a reduced walking capacity. In addition, the authors further
believe that reduced gripping function of the lesser toes is a major cause of
reduced forefoot functionality. The study has no data to support this claim, but
surgical intervention of the lesser toes with osteotomies and soft tissue
reconstructions, regardless of the surgical approach or method, reduces the length
of the digits and hence the initial tension of the flexor tendons, which can cause
loss of strength. Thus, forefoot function is the most difficult part to reestablish
with any type of forefoot arthroplasty. Other techniques like modified metatarsal
shortening offset osteotomies might achieve some improved clinical scores, but this
technique also has some limitations, as seen in the range of motion. It is also
lacking long-term follow-up.[12,23] However, it seems a good option particularly in the time of
newer RA therapeutic agents.This study has some limitations. First, it is a retrospective study with a
self-constructed patient-based questionnaire. This questionnaire specifically
addressed the key points of forefoot reconstruction surgery, but it is not
validated. The already-established questionnaires (eg, the Foot Function Index or
the Foot and Ankle Disability Index) do not look at shoe wear, forefoot deformities,
or the gripping/standing function of the toes. However, the authors attempted in a
second step to retrieve validated outcome measures, but the attritional loss of
patients precluded inclusion of the data in the final paper. Second, the study did
not collect information regarding specific RA treatment regimens. Today, RA
therapeutic agents are much more effective, and deformity of the forefoot is seldom
as severe as it was 20 or more years ago. Nonetheless, there is an urgent need to
identify long-term results of surgical treatments, particularly in the event of
decreased numbers of deformities in RA cases, in order to keep surgical options and
outcomes in mind for patients with poor responses to current drug treatments. Third,
the postal survey resulted in a selection bias as only patients who had returned a
questionnaire could be considered. As a result, a specific dropout analysis cannot
be carried out. Trying to increase the participation level by contacting patients by
telephone and/or offering to schedule an appointment at the hospital to complete the
questionnaires did not raise participation numbers. For the majority of eligible
participants, completing the questionnaire was too tiring or complicated due to
various factors (eg, dementia, increased age—45 out of 46 patients were over the age
of 80 years), and several patients simply showed no interest in participating in any
sort of questionnaire. None of the eligible participants who were spoken to
expressed any sort of general dissatisfaction with the operation. Also, the study
lacks clinical follow-up examinations. However, the answers that were given by the
relatively large sample size (having regard to the time that has elapsed since the
surgeries) so long after the surgery was performed provide crucial and hitherto
unknown insight for patients and surgeons alike who are considering this type of
surgery.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this follow-up study of patients with RA more than 20 years after they
had undergone forefoot reconstruction surgery as described by Tillmann demonstrates
compelling long-term outcomes from the surgery. For instance, the procedure reduced
pain at rest in more than 70% of patients, and more than 60% of patients could wear
conventional shoes. Furthermore, patients had significantly increased walking
distances with shoes compared with without shoes. The forefoot function remained
difficult to assess, but the Tillman procedure continued to yield long-term
satisfying results for basic standing functions in this particular group of
patients. Overall, 20 years after having the Tillmann procedure, the overall patient
satisfaction level remained high, with more than 80% of participants in this study
being satisfied. These findings are of paramount importance as the Tillmann
procedure remains a solid surgical option today for patients who are refractory to
newer treatments.The study was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki of 1975, as
revised in 2000, and with ethical approval obtained from the local ethics committee
of the Hamburg medical association (registration no. PV4826). All included patients
gave written informed consent. No animal experiments were performed.Click here for additional data file.Supplemental material, DS_10.1177_1071100719840814 for Forefoot Reconstruction
Following Metatarsal Head Resection Arthroplasty With a Plantar Approach—A
20-Year Follow-Up by Maciej J. K. Simon, André Strahl, Haider Mussawy, Tim
Rolvien, Robert F. Schumacher, Marcel Seller and Wolfgang Rüther in Foot &
Ankle InternationalClick here for additional data file.Supplemental material, FAI840814-ICMJE for Forefoot Reconstruction Following
Metatarsal Head Resection Arthroplasty With a Plantar Approach—A 20-Year
Follow-Up by Maciej J. K. Simon, André Strahl, Haider Mussawy, Tim Rolvien,
Robert F. Schumacher, Marcel Seller and Wolfgang Rüther in Foot & Ankle
International
Authors: Ana Belen Ortega-Avila; Antonio Moreno-Velasco; Pablo Cervera-Garvi; Magdalena Martinez-Rico; Esther Chicharro-Luna; Gabriel Gijon-Noqueron Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2019-12-24 Impact factor: 4.241