Hallux valgus angle as main predictor for correction of hallux valgus

Contains fulltext : 70112.pdf ( ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: It is recognized that different types of hallux valgus exist. Classification occurs with radiographic and clinical parameters. Severity of different parameters is used in algorithms to choose between different surgical procedures. Because there is no consensus about each parameter nor their cut-off point we conducted this study to analyze the influence of these variables on the postoperative hallux valgus angle. METHODS: After informed consent 115 patients (136 feet) were included. Bunionectomy, osteotomy, lateralization of the distal fragment, lateral release and medial capsulorrhaphy were performed in all patients. Data were collected on preoperative and postoperative HVA, IMA and DMAA measurements. Forty cases were included since our findings in a previous article 1, therefore, current data concern an expanded study group with longer follow-up and were not published before. At least two-year follow-up data were evaluated with logistic regression and independent t-tests. RESULTS: Preoperative HVA was significant for prediction of postoperative HVA in logistic regression. IMA and DMAA were not significant for prediction of postoperative HVA in logistic regression, although they were significantly increased in larger deformities. In patients with preoperative HVA of 37 degrees or more, satisfactory correction could be obtained in 65 percent. The other nine of these 26 patients developed subluxation. CONCLUSION: The preoperative HVA was the main radiological predictor for correction of hallux valgus, correction rate declined from preoperative HVA of 37. IMA and DMAA did have a minor role in patients with preoperative HVA lower than 37 degrees, however, likely contributed to preoperative HVA of 37 degrees or more

Comparison of tonic spinal cord stimulation, high-frequency and burst stimulation in patients with complex regional pain syndrome: a double-blind, randomised placebo controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) is a disabling disease that is sometimes difficult to treat. Although spinal cord stimulation (SCS) can reduce pain in most patients with CRPS, some do not achieve the desired reduction in pain. Moreover, the pain reduction can diminish over time even after an initially successful period of SCS. Pain reduction can be regained by increasing the SCS frequency, but this has not been investigated in a prospective trial. This study compares pain reduction using five SCS frequencies (standard 40 Hz, 500 Hz, 1200 Hz, burst and placebo stimulation) in patients with CRPS to determine which of the modalities is most effective. DESIGN: All patients with a confirmed CRPS diagnosis that have unsuccessfully tried all other therapies and are eligible for SCS, can enroll in this trial (primary implantation group). CRPS patients that already receive SCS therapy, or those previously treated with SCS but with loss of therapeutic effect over time, can also participate (re-implantation group). Once all inclusion criteria are met and written informed consent obtained, patients will undergo a baseline assessment (T0). A 2-week trial with SCS is performed and, if successful, a rechargeable internal pulse generator (IPG) is implanted. For the following 3 months the patient will have standard 40 Hz stimulation therapy before a follow-up assessment (T1) is performed. Those who have completed the T1 assessment will enroll in a 10-week crossover period in which the five SCS frequencies are tested in five periods, each frequency lasting for 2 weeks. At the end of the crossover period, the patient will choose which frequency is to be used for stimulation for an additional 3 months, until the T2 assessment. DISCUSSION: Currently no trials are available that systematically investigate the importance of variation in frequency during SCS in patients with CRPS. Data from this trial will provide better insight as to whether SCS with a higher frequency, or with burst stimulation, results in more effective pain relief. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN3665525