BACKGROUND:Proximal inter-phalangeal (PIP) joint arthrodesis today represents the standard treatment for structured hammertoes; however, recently, a lot of new intramedullary devices for the fixation of this arthrodesis have been introduced. The purpose of this work is to look at the currently available devices and to perform a review of the present literature.MATERIALS AND METHODS:A literature search of PubMed/Medline and Google Scholar databases, considering works published up until September 2014 and using the keywords: hammertoe, arthrodesis, PIP joint, fusion, intramedullary devices, and K-wire, was performed. The published papers were included in the present study only if they met the following inclusion criteria: English articles, arthrodesis of PIP joints for hammertoes with new generation intramedullary devices, series with n > 10. Studies using absorbable pins or screws that are considered as another kind of fixation that involved more than one articulation, as well as comments, letters to the editor, or newsletters were excluded.RESULTS:Nine publications were included. Of the patients' reports, 93-100 % were good or excellent concerning satisfaction. Radiological arthrodesis was achieved in 60.5-100 % of cases. Three of the publications compared the new devices with the K-wire. Of these three articles, two employed the traditional technique and one the buried technique. The AOFAS score, evaluated in three publications, showed a delta of 19, 45 and 58 points. Major complications, which required a secondary surgical revision, were between 0 and 8.6 %. The complications of the K-wire and the new devices were similar; also the reoperation rate was close to equal (maximal difference 2 %). On the other hand, these kinds of devices definitely have a higher price, compared to the K-wire.CONCLUSION:The use of these new devices provides good results; however, their high price is currently a problem. For this reason, cost-benefit studies seem to be necessary to justify their use as standard treatment.KEYWORDS:Arthrodesis; Fusion; Hammertoe; Intramedullary devices; K-wire; PIP joint; Review
Arthrodesis of proximal inter-phalangeal joint for hammertoe: intramedullary device options / Guelfi, M; Pantalone, A; Cambiaso Daniel, J; Vanni, D; Guelfi, Mg; Salini, Vincenzo. - In: JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDICS AND TRAUMATOLOGY. - ISSN 1590-9921. - 16:4(2015), pp. 269-273. [10.1007/s10195-015-0360-0]
Arthrodesis of proximal inter-phalangeal joint for hammertoe: intramedullary device options
SALINI, VINCENZO
2015-01-01
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Proximal inter-phalangeal (PIP) joint arthrodesis today represents the standard treatment for structured hammertoes; however, recently, a lot of new intramedullary devices for the fixation of this arthrodesis have been introduced. The purpose of this work is to look at the currently available devices and to perform a review of the present literature.MATERIALS AND METHODS:A literature search of PubMed/Medline and Google Scholar databases, considering works published up until September 2014 and using the keywords: hammertoe, arthrodesis, PIP joint, fusion, intramedullary devices, and K-wire, was performed. The published papers were included in the present study only if they met the following inclusion criteria: English articles, arthrodesis of PIP joints for hammertoes with new generation intramedullary devices, series with n > 10. Studies using absorbable pins or screws that are considered as another kind of fixation that involved more than one articulation, as well as comments, letters to the editor, or newsletters were excluded.RESULTS:Nine publications were included. Of the patients' reports, 93-100 % were good or excellent concerning satisfaction. Radiological arthrodesis was achieved in 60.5-100 % of cases. Three of the publications compared the new devices with the K-wire. Of these three articles, two employed the traditional technique and one the buried technique. The AOFAS score, evaluated in three publications, showed a delta of 19, 45 and 58 points. Major complications, which required a secondary surgical revision, were between 0 and 8.6 %. The complications of the K-wire and the new devices were similar; also the reoperation rate was close to equal (maximal difference 2 %). On the other hand, these kinds of devices definitely have a higher price, compared to the K-wire.CONCLUSION:The use of these new devices provides good results; however, their high price is currently a problem. For this reason, cost-benefit studies seem to be necessary to justify their use as standard treatment.KEYWORDS:Arthrodesis; Fusion; Hammertoe; Intramedullary devices; K-wire; PIP joint; ReviewI documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
