| Literature DB >> 34863257 |
Martin Zaleski1, Timo Tondelli2, Sandro Hodel2, Dominic Rigling2, Stephan Wirth2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this retrospective study was to examine if a correlation between Morton's Neuroma (MN) and an increased interphalangeal angle (IPA) or intermetatarsal angle (IMA) can be found in preoperative weightbearing dorsal-plantar X-rays of the foot.Entities:
Keywords: Diagnosis; Dorsal-plantar X-ray; Forefoot disorders; Intermetatarsal angle; Interphalangeal angle; MRI; Morton’s neuroma
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34863257 PMCID: PMC8642935 DOI: 10.1186/s13047-021-00502-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Foot Ankle Res ISSN: 1757-1146 Impact factor: 2.303
Patient characteristics
| n | |
|---|---|
| patients with MN | 45 |
| patients with bilateral MN | 4 |
| included feet with MN | 49 |
| right foot with MN | 24 |
| left foot with MN | 25 |
| 3/4 interspace | 39 |
| 2/3 interspace | 10 |
| controls | 49 |
| ethnicity of patients and controls | caucasian |
| mean age of patients with MN (sd) | 50,7 (12,9) years |
| mean age of controls (sd) | 50,6 (12,4) years |
| female patients with MN | 36 |
| female controls | 39 |
| male patients with MN | 9 |
| male controls | 10 |
Fig. 1Radiological measurements. IPA = Interphalangeal angle; IMA = Intermetatarsal angle
Radiographic measurements between groups
| Interspace | MN (degrees) | Control (degrees) | Paired Diff. | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IPA 3/4* | 5.3 (−3.0; 14.1) | 2.6 (− 5.7; 7.0) | 2.8 | *0.000 |
| IMA 3/4* | 6.2 (4.0; 10.2) | 5.7 (1.4; 9.0) | 1.0 | *0.048 |
| IPA 2/3 | 8.5 (3.9; 28.6) | 4.4 (2.3; 10.5) | 1.4 | 0.126 |
| IMA 2/3 | 3.6 (0.4; 5.8) | 3.0 (0.3; 5.4) | 0.8 | 0.646 |
| IMA 2/4 | 9.0 (3.8; 14.9) | 8.6 (2.9; 13.1) | 0.9 | 0.128 |
| IMA 2/5 | 16.2 (7.5; 24.3) | 17.0 (7.1; 24.3) | −0.3 | 0.874 |
| IMA 1/5 | 25.0 (17.8; 32.3) | 26.0 (14.9; 38.5) | 0.4 | 0.925 |
Median and range (in brackets) in degrees. Paired difference denotes median of paired differences. P-values were calculated by Wilcoxon-signed rank test. IPA Interphalangeal angle; IMA Intermetatarsal angle
Diagnostic performance
| IPA 3/4* | IMA 3/4* | IMA 2/4 | IMA 2/5 | IMA 1/5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity | 0.73 | 0.71 | 0.53 | 0.69 | 0.71 |
| Specificity | 0.67 | 0.43 | 0.55 | 0.39 | 0.41 |
| Accuracy | 0.70 | 0.57 | 0.54 | 0.54 | 0.56 |
| OR | 5.71 | 1.88 | 1.39 | 1.44 | 1.72 |
| AUC | 0.75 | 0.64 | 0.57 | 0.49 | 0.50 |
| AUC CI 95 | (0.65–0.85) | (0.52–0.75) | (0.46–0.66) | (0.39–0.59) | (0.4–0.6) |
| *0.000 | *0.031 | 0.262 | 0.833 | 0.989 |
OR Diagnostic odds ratio, AUC Area under curve, CI 95 95% Confidence interval, P-val p-value; P-val (AUC = 0.5) denotes p-value of each AUC tested against 0.5, binomial z-test; IPA Interphalangeal angle, IMA Intermetatarsal angle