Abstract
Background:
The minimally invasive chevron-Akin (MICA) osteotomy is an increasingly popular technique for the correction of hallux valgus. However, there is a paucity of literature comparing it with traditional open techniques. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of the MICA osteotomy using a new-generation MICA screw and scarf-Akin osteotomy for hallux valgus correction.
Methods:
Thirty cases of MICA osteotomy were propensity score matched 1:1 with a control group of 30 scarf-Akin osteotomy cases. The groups were matched for age, sex, body mass index, preoperative visual analog scale (VAS) score, American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) metatarsophalangeal-interphalangeal (MTP-IP) score, 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical component score (PCS) and mental component score (MCS), preoperative hallux valgus angle (HVA) and intermetatarsal angle (IMA), and concomitant procedures. Outcomes were compared at 6 and 24 months postoperatively. Early postoperative VAS scores were also compared.
Results:
Both groups demonstrated significant improvements in VAS score, AOFAS score, and SF-36 PCS and MCS at 6 and 24 months postoperatively. For the MICA group, HVA improved from 23.5 to 7.7 degrees, and IMA improved from 13.5 to 7.5 degrees. For the scarf-Akin osteotomy group, HVA improved from 23.7 to 9.3 degrees, and IMA improved from 13.6 to 7.8 degrees. The first 24-hour postoperative VAS score was significantly lower in the MICA group compared with the scarf-Akin group (2.0 ± 2.0 vs 3.4 ± 2.6, P = .029). However, there was no significant difference in clinical or radiological outcomes between the groups at 6 and 24 months.
Conclusion:
The MICA procedure with the new-generation MICA screw is an attractive option for the correction of hallux valgus, yielding similar midterm radiological and clinical outcomes compared with the well-established scarf-Akin osteotomy. The first 24-hour postoperative VAS score in the MICA group was also statistically lower, although its clinical significance remains to be determined.
Level of Evidence:
Level III, retrospective comparative study.
Keywords
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
