The distal metatarsal screw is not always necessary in third-generation MICA: a case-control study.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the clinical and radiological results after fixation of the first metatarsal head (MTH) with one or two screws as part of the third-generation minimally invasive Chevron-Akin osteotomy (MICA) for hallux valgus deformities. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between August 2020 and November 2021, 55 MICA procedures (50 patients, male:female = 7:43), 22 with two (MICA2), 33 with one screw (MICA1) were performed for mild to severe hallux valgus deformities. Exclusion criteria were a concomitant pes adductus (Sgarlato angle > 20°) or hindfoot/midfoot deformities requiring treatment. In 27 cases, additional procedures on the forefoot (small toe corrections or metatarsal osteotomies II-V) were necessary. Pre- and post-operatively, hallux valgus angle (HVA) and intermetatarsal I/II angle (IMA) were measured. Clinically, subjective satisfaction, range of motion (ROM) of the first metatarsophalangeal joint (MTPJ), and pain level (NRS score) were evaluated. The minimum follow-up was 12 months. RESULTS: Displacement of MTH was 70-90% on average, all osteotomies showed full consolidation at latest follow-up. In one case of either group, a slight subsidence of MTH was documented. The radiological and clinical parameters showed no differences between the groups. The pain level improved by an average of three points. The mobility of the MTPJ showed a slight reduction in nine cases after three months (4 MICA2, 5 MICA1) which persisted in three cases. Fifty-two of 55 patients (95%) would opt again for the operation. CONCLUSIONS: Fixation of the first MTH with a single bicortical screw in MICA with moderate lateralization of MTH shows stable anchoring and good clinical results. The routine use of a second metatarsal screw can be omitted.

[Periprosthetic fractures after total knee arthroplasty]. / Periprothetische Frakturen nach Knietotalendoprothetik.

The increasing implantation rates of knee arthroplasties are associated with a growing prevalence of complications like periprosthetic fractures. Underlying patient, implant and/or operation technique-related risk factors contribute to these fractures which often occur after minor trauma. In the diagnostic process, fracture dislocation, implant stability, and integrity of the extensor mechanism have to be assessed. Valid classification systems are available to guide treatment decisions. Treatment goals are precise reposition, stable fixation, restoration of function, and early mobilization. In the case of an operative revision, the surgeon has to know the implanted device and has to be prepared for extended procedures and revision arthroplasty. Less invasive fixation devices like retrograde nailing or LISS are often sufficient to stabilize femoral supracondylar fractures, while loosening of the implant often requires extended exchange arthroplasty. Tibial fractures are often associated with osteolysis and bone loss which has to be addressed with bone grafts or augmented revision implants. Long-stemmed implants allow bypassing of the reconstructed defect and provide a stable solution for early mobilization. Patella fractures with stable or asymptomatic implants and continuity of the extensor mechanism should be treated conservatively. If reconstruction becomes necessary, results are often associated with significant functional limitations.