Background: Subtalar middle facet (MF) subluxation was recognized as a reliable marker for progressive collapsing foot deformity (PCFD) diagnosis. Foot and Ankle Offset (FAO) is an established measurement, predictive of malalignment severity. The objective of this study was to assess the potential association between MF subluxation and FAO in PCFD patients. Methods: 56 individuals with flexible PCFD (74 feet) were assessed. Two blinded foot and ankle surgeons calculated MF uncoverage, MF incongruence, and FAO. Agreement was quantified using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). A multivariate regression analysis and partition prediction models were applied to assess relationship between values. Results: All ICCs were >0.80. MF subluxation and FAO were found to be correlated ( rs = 0.56; P < .0001). Changes in the MF subluxation were noticeably explained by FAO and BMI ( R2 = 0.33). MF incongruence was not correlated with the assessed variables ( P = .10). In this cohort, an MF subluxation of 27.5% was a threshold for increased FAO (FAO of 3.4%±2.4% when below; FAO of 8.0% ±3.5% when above). Conclusion: We found a correlation between MF subluxation and FAO. An MF subluxation of 27.5% was found to be a threshold for higher FAO, which corresponded to a greater malalignment. These data may help surgeons optimize treatment decisions in PCFD patients. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Background The Distal Metatarsal Articular Angle (DMAA) was previously described as an increase in valgus deformity of the distal articular surface of the first metatarsal (M1) in hallux valgus (HV). Several studies have reported poor reliability of this measurement. Some authors have even called into question its existence and consider it to be the consequence of M1 pronation resulting in projection of the round-shaped lateral edge of M1 head. Our study aimed to compare the DMAA in HV and control populations, before and after computer correction of M1 pronation and plantarflexion with a dedicated weightbearing CT (WBCT) software. We hypothesized that after computerized correction, DMAA will not be increased in HV compared to controls. Methods: We performed a retrospective case-control study including 36 HV and 20 control feet. In both groups, DMAA was measured as initially described on conventional radiographs (XR-DMAA) and WBCT by measuring the angle between the distal articular surface and the longitudinal axis of M1. Then, the DMAA was measured after computerized correction of M1 plantarflexion and coronal plane rotation using the α angle (3d-DMAA). Results: The XR-DMAA and the 3d-DMAA showed higher significant mean values in HV group compared to controls (respectively 25.9 ± 7.3 vs 7.6 ± 4.2 degrees, P < .001, and 11.9 ± 4.9 vs 3.3 ± 2.9 degrees, P < .001). Comparing a small subset of precorrected juvenile HV (n=8) and nonjuvenile HV (n=28) demonstrated no significant difference in the measure DMAA values. On the other hand, the α angle was significantly higher in the juvenile HV group (21.6 ± 9.9 and 11.4 ± 3.7 degrees; P = .0046). Conclusion: Although the valgus deformity of M1 distal articular surface in HV is overestimated on conventional radiographs, comparing to controls showed that an 8.6 degrees increase remained after confounding factors’ correction. Clinical Relevance: After pronation computerized correction, an increase in valgus of M1 distal articular surface was still present in HV compared to controls. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective case-control study.

Intravenous therapy is a common practice among many specialties. Intravenous therapy extravasation is a potential complication to such therapy. Hospitals without a dedicated wound care team trained in these interventions will often default to plastic surgical consultation, making an understanding of available interventions essential to the initial evaluation and management of these injuries. The goal of this article was to provide plastic surgeons and health care providers with a general overview of the acute management of intravenous infiltration and extravasation injuries. Though the decision for surgical versus nonsurgical management is often a clear one for plastic surgeons, local interventions, and therapies are often indicated and under-utilized in the immediate postinfiltration period. Thorough knowledge of these interventions should be a basic requirement in the armamentarium of plastic surgery consultants.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Background: We previously reported an increase in pronation of the first metatarsal (M1) head relative to the ground in hallux valgus (HV) patients compared to controls. Still, the origin and location of this hyperpronation along the medial column is unknown. Recent studies showed that presence of progressive collapsing foot deformities (PCFDs), which is a condition frequently associated with HV, can strongly influence the medial column coronal plane alignment. The objective of this study was to assess the coronal rotation of the medial column bones in HV feet, HV feet with radiologic markers of PCFD, and controls. We hypothesized that hyperpronation in HV will originate from a combination of M1 intrinsic torsion and first tarsometatarsal joint malposition. Methods: The same cohort of 36 HV and 20 controls matched on age, gender, and body mass index was used. Previously, a validation of the measurements was carried out through a cadaveric study. Using these metrics, we assessed the coronal plane rotation of the navicular, medial cuneiform, and the M1 at its base and head with respect to the ground using weightbearing CT images. We measured the Meary angle and the calcaneal moment arm in our 36 HV subjects. We subdivided our cohort into an HV group and a potential PCFD HV group according to these measurements. Comparisons on medial column bones coronal rotation were performed between HV, PCFD HV, and control groups. Results: Twenty-two HV cases were included in the HV group and 14 in the PCFD HV group. Both groups presented an increase in pronation of the first metatarsal head relative to the ground when compared to the control group ( P < .001). Comparing HV and controls showed an 8.3 degrees increase in pronation of M1 intrinsic torsion ( P < .001) and a 4.7 degrees pronated malposition of the first tarsometatarsal joint ( P = .02) in HV. A 9.7 degrees supinated malposition of the first naviculocuneiform joint ( P < .001) was also observed in HV. Comparing PCFD HV and controls showed a significant increase in pronation of the navicular (respectively, 17.2 ± 5.4 and 12.3 ± 3.4 degrees, P = .007) and a 5.5 degrees increase in pronation of M1 intrinsic torsion ( P = .02) in PCFD HV, without malposition of the first tarsometatarsal and naviculocuneiform joints. Conclusion: Hyperpronation of the M1 head relative to the ground originated from both increases in pronation of M1 intrinsic torsion and first tarsometatarsal joint malposition in HV, although partially counterbalanced by a supinated malposition of the first naviculocuneiform joint. On the other hand, PCFD HV patients showed a generalized pronated position throughout the medial column from the navicular to the M1 head and may be related to the midfoot and hindfoot deformities frequently present in PCFD. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study.