Evaluation of therapeutic efficacy of arthroplasty with Swanson prosthesis in the surgical treatment of 2-5 metatarsophalangeal joint diseases

  • Zhong-di LIU ,
  • Hao LU ,
  • Yu-song YUAN ,
  • Hai-lin XU
Expand
  • Department of Trauma and Orthopedics, Trauma Medical Center, Peking University People’s Hospital, Beijing 100044, China

Received date: 2019-01-27

  Online published: 2020-08-06

Supported by

Beijing Science and Technology Plan Project(Z181100001718159);Research and Development Fund of Peking University People’s Hospital(RDH20127-01)

Abstract

Objective: Metatarsophalangeal joint is an important joint for daily weight-bearing walking. Osteoarthritis, osteochondrosis of the metatarsal head, rheumatoid arthritis can often cause the destruction of 2-5 metatarsophalangeal joint, leading to pain, limited joint movement and toe deformities, severely affecting the forefoot function. The purpose of this study is to report the results of middle-long term follow-up after performing Swanson double-stem silicon implant arthroplasty in patients with diseases of 2-5 metatarsophalangeal joint. Methods: From January 2010 to October 2015, 21 patients with 2-5 metatarsophalangeal joint replacement were performed with Swanson double-stem silicone prosthesis. In the study, 16 cases were successfully followed up,2 men and 14 women with an average age (66.7±5.5) years. There were 9 cases diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis, 5 cases with severe osteoarthritis and 2 cases with osteochondrosis of the metatarsal head. The American Association of foot and ankle surgery Maryland foot scoring system and visual analogue score (VAS) were used to evaluate the walking function, metatarsophalangeal joint mobility and pain degree before and after surgery. Results: The follow-up time ranged from 17 months to 5 years, with an average of 3.2 years. According to Maryland foot scoring system of the American Association of foot and ankle surgery, the preoperative score was (60.69±6.12) points and postoperative score was (88.13±5.84) points. Range of motion of metatarsophalangeal joint: preoperative: back extension 5.4°±3.1°, plantar flexion 4.4°±2.7°; postoperative: back extension 15.7°±4.5°, plantar flexion 12.2°±4.3°, the motion of 2-5 metatarsophalangeal joint after operation was significantly improved compared with that before operation (P<0.01). The preoperative VAS was (6.8±0.9) points and the last follow-up was (2.3±0.8) points, the pain symptom of metatarsophalangeal joint was improved obviously after operation. The postoperative score was significantly higher than the preoperative score according to Maryland foot scoring system (P<0.01), the excellent rate was 81.3%. Conclusion: With the advantages of alleviating pain, preserving the length and alignment of metatarsophalangeal joint, improving the function of walking, and correcting the deformity, Swanson double-stem silicon implant arthroplasty is a reproducible and safe option for the reconstruction of the 2-5 metatarsophalangeal joint. However, there is still some probability of adverse reactions and still room for improvement.

Cite this article

Zhong-di LIU , Hao LU , Yu-song YUAN , Hai-lin XU . Evaluation of therapeutic efficacy of arthroplasty with Swanson prosthesis in the surgical treatment of 2-5 metatarsophalangeal joint diseases[J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2020 , 52(4) : 726 -729 . DOI: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2020.04.025

References

[1] Nery C, Baumfeld D. Lesser metatarsophalangeal joint instability: Treatment with tendon transfers[J]. Foot Ankle Clin, 2018,23(1):103-126.
[2] Swanson AB, de Groot Swanson G. Use of grommets for flexible hinge implant arthroplasty of the great toe[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1997(340):87-94.
[3] Phisitkul P. Managing complications of lesser toe and metatarsophalangeal joint surgery[J]. Foot Ankle Clin, 2018,23(1):145-156.
[4] Davies MS, Saxby TS. Metatarsal neck osteotomy with rigid internal fixation for the treatment of lesser toe metatarsophalangeal joint pathology[J]. Foot Ankle Int, 1999,20(10):630-635.
[5] Stevens J, de Bot R, Hermus J, et al. Clinical outcome following total joint replacement and arthrodesis for hallux rigidus: A systematic review[J]. JBJS Rev, 2017,5(11):e2.
[6] Erdil M, Elmada? NM, Polat G, et al. Comparison of arthrodesis, resurfacing hemiarthroplasty, and total joint replacement in the treatment of advanced hallux rigidus[J]. J Foot Ankle Surg, 2013,52(5):588-593.
[7] O'Malley MJ, Basran HS, Gu Y, et al. Treatment of advanced stages of hallux rigidus with cheilectomy and phalangeal osteotomy[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2013,95(7):606-610.
[8] Swanson AB, Lumsden RM, Swanson GD. Silicone implant arthroplasty of the great toe. A review of single stem and flexible hinge implants[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1979, (142):30-43.
[9] Moeckel BH, Sculco TP, Alexiades MM, et al. The double-stemmed silicone-rubber implant for rheumatoid arthritis of the first metatarsophalangeal joint. Long-term results[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 1992,74(4):564-570.
[10] Peace RA, Hamilton GA. End-stage hallux rigidus: cheilectomy, implant, or arthrodesis?[J]. Clin Podiatr Med Surg, 2012,29(3):341-353.
[11] Valentini R, de Fabrizio G, Piovan G. First metatarsophalangeal joint replacement with total arthroplasty in the surgical treatment of the hallux rigidus[J]. Acta Biomed, 2014,85(Suppl 2):113-117.
[12] Stone OD, Ray R, Thomson CE, et al. Long-term follow-up of arthrodesis vs total joint arthroplasty for hallux rigidus[J]. Foot Ankle Int, 2017,38(4):375-380.
[13] Brewster M. Does total joint replacement or arthrodesis of the first metatarsophalangeal joint yield better functional results? A syste-matic review of the literature[J]. J Foot Ankle Surg, 2010,49(6):546-552.
[14] Shereff MJ, Jahss MH. Complications of silastic implant arthroplasty in the hallux[J]. Foot Ankle, 1980,1(2):95-101.
[15] Erkocak OF, Senaran H, Altan E, et al. Short-term functional outcomes of first metatarsophalangeal total joint replacement for hallux rigidus[J]. Foot Ankle Int, 2013,34(11):1569-1579.
Outlines

/