Home > Journals > Minerva Ortopedica e Traumatologica > Past Issues > Minerva Ortopedica e Traumatologica 2008 December;59(6) > Minerva Ortopedica e Traumatologica 2008 December;59(6):321-8

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe PROMO
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Reprints
Permissions

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLES   

Minerva Ortopedica e Traumatologica 2008 December;59(6):321-8

Copyright © 2008 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

SERI versuSERI versus “en chevron”: a comparative study between two surgical techniques for the correction of hallux valgus

Marmotti A., Castoldi F., Bratulich A., Grassi Mantelli A., Giai Via A.

Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Medical College of Turin Mauriziano “Umberto I” Hospital University of Turin, Turin, Italy


PDF


Aim. Compare indications and results of En-chevron osteotomy and SERI technique.
Methods. The study took in consideration 55 feet: En-chevron osteotomy was performed on 30 feet, SERI technique on 25, with a mean follow-up of 2.5 years. Preoperative and postoperative clinical and radiographical evaluations have been collected using AOFAS score system and radiographs, calculating hallux valgus angle (HVA), intermetatarsal angle (IMA), distal metatarsal articular angle (DMAA) and sesamoids position.
Results. Results was evaluated using the Student’s t test. En chevron group: mean HVA from 30.1° to 14.4° (±6.7 DS), mean IMA from 13.4° to 8.4° (±1.4 DS), mean DMAA from 11.6° to 8.4° (±4.5 DS), sesamoids from 2.4 to 1.3 (±0.7 DS); AOFAS hallux score from 57.1 a 83.3 (±12.2 DS). SERI group: mean HVA from 31° to 20.1° (±7.2 DS), mean IMA from 13.7° to 8-8° (±2.7 DS), mean DMAA from 10.6° to 6.5° (±2.6 DS), sesamoids from 2.4 to 1.1 (±0.8 DS); AOFAS hallux score from 56.4 a 81.1 (±11.2 DS).
Conclusion. Radiological results and patients’ satisfaction suggest both techniques are successful in treating hallux valgus deformity, but SERI technique allows a shorter surgical time and cost reductions. There are some differences in the amount of correction of the radiological angles between the two techniques.

top of page