Impact of Sesamoid Coverage on Clinical Foot Function Following Fourth-Generation Percutaneous Hallux Valgus Surgery

Foot Ankle Orthop. 2024 Feb 15;9(1):24730114241230560. doi: 10.1177/24730114241230560. eCollection 2024 Jan.

Abstract

Background: The impact of pronation and sesamoid coverage on clinical outcomes following percutaneous hallux valgus surgery are not currently known. The aim of this study was to investigate if sesamoid coverage was associated with worse clinical outcomes at 12-month follow-up following percutaneous hallux valgus surgery.

Methods: Retrospective comparative observational study of clinical and radiographic outcomes based on a previously published prospective dataset. Patients were stratified into 3 cohorts based on the degree of sesamoid coverage (normal, mild, or moderate) on 12-month weightbearing radiographs following fourth-generation percutaneous hallux valgus surgery. Primary outcome was a validated patient-reported outcome measure (PROM), the Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ). Secondary outcomes included Euroqol-5D, VAS Pain, and radiographic deformity correction.

Results: Forty-seven feet underwent primary fourth-generation HV surgery and were stratified into 3 cohorts. There were 19, 16, and 12 feet in the normal, mild, and moderate cohorts respectively. There was no significant difference in either pre- or postoperative foot function (all MOXFQ domains, P > .05) or health-related quality of life (EQ-5D Index or VAS, P > .05). The MOXFQ Index preoperatively was as follows: normal cohort, 56.1 ± 26.9; mild cohort, 54.1 ± 17.9; and severe cohort, 49.6 ± 23.8; and postoperatively was as follows: normal cohort, 15.6 ± 21.5; mild cohort, 11.4 ± 15.5; and severe cohort, 11.4 ± 13.6 (P = .737-.908). There was significantly worse hallux valgus angle (HVA) and intermetatarsal angle (IMA) between the cohorts (P < .01). Although HVA and IMA were corrected to normal parameters following surgery in all cohorts, there was a significantly worse postoperative HVA in the moderate sesamoid coverage (5.3 ± 3.9 vs 7.9 ± 5.3 vs 11.4 ± 3.7, P < .01); however, IMA was not significantly different (3.4 ± 2.2 vs 4.1 ± 2.7 vs 5.2 ± 2.9, P = .168).

Conclusion: This study found that cases where the sesamoids were not reduced had a poorer correction and had worse preoperative deformity. Clinical outcomes and foot function following fourth-generation percutaneous hallux valgus surgery were not affected by sesamoid coverage at the 12-month follow-up. The long-term implications in the difference in radiographic deformity between the 3 cohorts are not known, and further work should explore the relationship of first ray pronation and sesamoid position, particularly with regard to recurrence.

Level of evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study of prospectively collected data.

Keywords: forefoot deformity; forefoot surgery; hallux valgus; minimally invasive surgery; percutaneous surgery; pronation; sesamoid.