Abstract

BackgroundArthrodesis and metallic hemiarthroplasty are two surgical interventions for the treatment of end-stage osteoarthritis of the first metatarsophalangeal (MTP1) joint. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare the two operations with regards to patient-reported outcomes, pain reduction, complications and revision rates. MethodsA systematic literature search identified all relevant studies. The methodological quality was assessed using two validated tools. Data of interest were derived and presented. For non-comparative studies, data was assessed for trends, while for comparative studies pooling statistics were performed. ResultsA total of 33 studies were included for analysis. The majority of studies (>75%) reported an AOFAS-HMI score greater than 80 points after both metallic hemiarthroplasty and arthrodesis. The lowest VAS pain score was observed after arthrodesis (weighted mean difference -1.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) −2.16 to −1.00 P< 0.00001). Comparable numbers of complications (odds radio 1.48, 95% CI 0.81 to 2.73, P = 0.21, favoring: hemiarthroplasty) and revisions (odds ratio 1.16, 95% CI 0.62 to 2.15 P = 0.64, favoring: hemiarthroplasty) were observed after both interventions. The included non-comparative studies seem to confirm these findings of the comparative studies. ConclusionMetallic hemiarthroplasty and arthrodesis have excellent clinical outcomes and acceptable complication- and revision rates. Arthrodesis seems to be superior in pain reduction, while metallic hemiarthroplasty is a suitable alternative for patients performing activities that requires motion in the first metatarsophalangeal joint.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.