Literature DB >> 33596196

Percutaneous Chevron/Akin (PECA) versus open scarf/Akin (SA) osteotomy treatment for hallux valgus: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Gabriel Ferraz Ferreira1, Vinícius Quadros Borges2, Leonardo Vinícius de Matos Moraes3, Kelly Cristina Stéfani4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The objective of the study is to compare the radiographic and clinical results of two techniques for the treatment of hallux valgus that have the same indication, the open scarf/Akin (SA) technique and the percutaneous Chevron/Akin (PECA).
METHODS: A meta-analysis was performed with the studies found during a systematic review of articles included in electronic databases until 30 May 2020. The pooled analysis was summarized according to clinical outcomes, such as visual analog pain scale (VAS) and American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, radiographic outcomes and complications, with a 95% confidence interval.
RESULTS: Three studies comparing the open scarf/Akin (SA) versus the PECA techniques were added to the analysis, corresponding to 235 feet, 102 in the PECA group and 133 in the SA. The final mean difference in the hallux valgus angle was 0.80 degrees and in the intermetatarsal angle 0.53, in the last radiographic evaluation. In the AOFAS score, the final mean difference was 4.97 points and in the VAS 0.14 in relation to the last clinical evaluation. Exposure to radiation during the surgical procedure was higher in the PECA group with a mean of 35.53 seconds.
CONCLUSIONS: The PECA surgical technique for the treatment of hallux valgus when compared with SA demonstrated similar radiographic correction, pain and function after six months of follow-up but with a longer radiation exposure time. REGISTER OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (PROSPERO): CRD42018096613.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33596196      PMCID: PMC7888602          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242496

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  22 in total

Review 1.  Interventions for treating hallux valgus (abductovalgus) and bunions.

Authors:  J Ferrari; J P Higgins; R L Williams
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2000

2.  The chevron osteotomy for correction of hallux valgus. Comparison of findings after two and five years of follow-up.

Authors:  H J Trnka; A Zembsch; M E Easley; M Salzer; P Ritschl; M S Myerson
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 3.  Salvage of complications of hallux valgus surgery.

Authors:  Daniel E Lehman
Journal:  Foot Ankle Clin       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 1.653

Review 4.  Minimally invasive hallux valgus surgery: a critical review of the evidence.

Authors:  Hans-Joerg Trnka; Sabine Krenn; Reinhard Schuh
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-08-29       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Radiographic results after percutaneous distal metatarsal osteotomy for correction of hallux valgus deformity.

Authors:  Anish R Kadakia; Jonathan P Smerek; Mark S Myerson
Journal:  Foot Ankle Int       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 2.827

6.  Scarf osteotomy for hallux valgus deformity: an intermediate followup of clinical and radiographic outcomes.

Authors:  Arash Aminian; Armem Kelikian; Todd Moen
Journal:  Foot Ankle Int       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 2.827

Review 7.  Percutaneous Osteotomies in Hallux Valgus: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Ana Bia; Francisco Guerra-Pinto; Bruno S Pereira; Nuno Corte-Real; Xavier Martin Oliva
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Surg       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 1.286

8.  Hallux Valgus Correction Comparing Percutaneous Chevron/Akin (PECA) and Open Scarf/Akin Osteotomies.

Authors:  Moses Lee; James Walsh; Margaret M Smith; Jeff Ling; Andrew Wines; Peter Lam
Journal:  Foot Ankle Int       Date:  2017-05-05       Impact factor: 2.827

Review 9.  Hallux valgus: effectiveness and safety of minimally invasive surgery. A systematic review.

Authors:  Nicola Maffulli; Umile Giuseppe Longo; Andrea Marinozzi; Vincenzo Denaro
Journal:  Br Med Bull       Date:  2010-08-14       Impact factor: 4.291

10.  ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions.

Authors:  Jonathan Ac Sterne; Miguel A Hernán; Barnaby C Reeves; Jelena Savović; Nancy D Berkman; Meera Viswanathan; David Henry; Douglas G Altman; Mohammed T Ansari; Isabelle Boutron; James R Carpenter; An-Wen Chan; Rachel Churchill; Jonathan J Deeks; Asbjørn Hróbjartsson; Jamie Kirkham; Peter Jüni; Yoon K Loke; Theresa D Pigott; Craig R Ramsay; Deborah Regidor; Hannah R Rothstein; Lakhbir Sandhu; Pasqualina L Santaguida; Holger J Schünemann; Beverly Shea; Ian Shrier; Peter Tugwell; Lucy Turner; Jeffrey C Valentine; Hugh Waddington; Elizabeth Waters; George A Wells; Penny F Whiting; Julian Pt Higgins
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2016-10-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.