Hallux valgus (HV) presents as a common forefoot deformity that causes problems with pain, mobility, footwear, and quality of life. The most common open correction used in the UK is the Scarf and Akin osteotomy, which has good clinical and radiological outcomes and high levels of patient satisfaction when used to treat a varying degrees of deformity. However, there are concerns regarding recurrence rates and long-term outcomes. Minimally invasive or percutaneous surgery (MIS) has gained popularity, offering the potential for similar clinical and radiological outcomes with reduced postoperative pain and smaller scars. Despite this, MIS techniques vary widely, hindering comparison and standardization. This review evaluates the evidence for both open Scarf and Akin osteotomy and newer-generation MIS techniques. Fourth-generation MIS emphasizes multiplanar rotational deformity correction through stable fixation. While MIS techniques show promise, their evidence mainly comprises single-surgeon case series. Comparative studies between open and MIS techniques suggest similar clinical and radiological outcomes, although MIS may offer advantages in scar length and less early postoperative pain. MIS may afford superior correction in severe deformity and lower recurrence rates due to correcting the bony deformity rather than soft-tissue correction. Recurrence remains a challenge in HV surgery, necessitating long-term follow-up and standardized outcome measures for assessment. Any comparison between the techniques requires comparative studies. Surgeons must weigh the advantages and risks of both open and MIS approaches in collaboration with patients to determine the most suitable treatment. Cite this article:
Since 1996 more than one million metal-on-metal
articulations have been implanted worldwide. Adverse reactions to
metal debris are escalating. Here we present an algorithmic approach
to patient management. The general approach to all arthroplasty
patients returning for follow-up begins with a detailed history,
querying for pain, discomfort or compromise of function. Symptomatic
patients should be evaluated for intra-articular and extra-articular
causes of pain. In large head MoM arthroplasty, aseptic loosening
may be the source of pain and is frequently difficult to diagnose.
Sepsis should be ruled out as a source of pain. Plain radiographs
are evaluated to rule out loosening and osteolysis, and assess component
position. Laboratory evaluation commences with erythrocyte sedimentation
rate and C-reactive protein, which may be elevated. Serum metal
ions should be assessed by an approved facility. Aspiration, with
manual cell count and culture/sensitivity should be performed, with
cloudy to creamy fluid with predominance of monocytes often indicative
of failure. Imaging should include ultrasound or metal artifact
reduction sequence MRI, specifically evaluating for fluid collections
and/or masses about the hip. If adverse reaction to metal debris
is suspected then revision to metal or ceramic-on-polyethylene is indicated
and can be successful. Delay may be associated with extensive soft-tissue
damage and hence poor clinical outcome.
The mammalian growth plate is a complex structure which is essential for the elongation of long bones. However, an understanding of how the growth plate functions at the cellular level is lacking. This review, summarises the factors involved in growth-plate regulation, its failure and the consequence of injury. We also describe some of the cellular mechanisms which underpin the increase in volume of the growth-plate chondrocyte which is the major determinant of the rate and extent of bone lengthening. We show how living in situ chondrocytes can be imaged using 2-photon laser scanning microscopy to provide a quantitative analysis of their volume. This approach should give better understanding of the cellular control of bone growth in both healthy and failed growth plates.
Thromboprophylaxis remains a controversial subject. A vast amount of epidemiological and trial data about venous thromboembolism has been published over the past 40 years. These data have been distilled and synthesised into guidelines designed to help the practitioner translate this extensive research into ‘evidence-based’ advice. Guidelines should, in theory, benefit patient care by ensuring that every patient routinely receives the best prophylaxis; without guidelines, it is argued, patients may fail to receive treatment or be exposed to protocols which are ineffective, dangerous or expensive. Guidelines, however, have not been welcomed or applied universally. In the United States, orthopaedic surgeons have published their concerns about the thromboprophylaxis guidelines prepared by the American College of Chest Physicians. In Britain, controversy persists with many surgeons unconvinced of the risk/benefit, cost/benefit or practicality of thromboprophylaxis. The extended remit of the recent National Institute of Clinical Excellence thromboprophylaxis guidelines has been challenged. The reasons for this disquiet are addressed in this paper and particular emphasis is placed on how clinically-acceptable guidelines could be developed and applied.
