Level IV, retrospective case series.

No abstract

Patients who elected to discontinue osteoporosis treatment experienced a significant decline in the change in BMD compared to the change on teriparatide putting them at higher risk for recurrence of fragility fractures. Patients on denosumab following teriparatide had the largest increase in BMD.

Background: The Grand Rapids Arch Collapse Classification system was devised in 2011 to assist physicians' and patients' understanding of the mechanisms underlying arch collapse. Five types of arch collapse are described, based on which part of the foot or ankle is affected. The purpose of this study was to determine the inter-and intrarater reliability of this classification system when used by physicians with various levels of training. Methods: A senior author identified a stratified selection of 50 patients (10 per classification type) who presented with foot/ ankle pain and suitable radiographs. A survey was designed using prediagnosis radiographs and clinical synopses of the patient's chart. The survey consisted of a description of the classification scheme and the 50 cases in a randomized order. Eight weeks later, they repeated the test to analyze for intra-rater agreement. Results: Of the 33 physicians who received the survey, 26 completed the first round (16 attendings, 4 foot and ankle fellows, and 6 residents). Overall, there was substantial agreement among raters in all five types. Kappa scores for each type were 0.72, 0.65, 0.72, 0.70, 0.63, respectively. The combined kappa score was 0.68. After 8 weeks, 13 of the 26 participants repeated the study. A Kappa analysis was once again performed for the 13 respondents, which produced a substantial level of agreement with a value of 0.74 for intrarater reliability. Conclusion: The Grand Rapids Arch Collapse Classification system was designed to provide an accessible mechanism for physicians to consistently describe arch collapse, its effects, and the conditions associated with it. The utility of this system is wholly reliant on the repeatability among clinicians. This study has demonstrated that the classification system has substantial rates of reliability among physicians of different levels of experience and training. Level of evidence: Level IV.

The modified Lapidus arthrodesis is an accepted method of correcting varying degrees of hallux valgus with or without associated first ray insufficiency. Improved operative techniques have led to more reliable outcomes and lower incidence of nonunion. As a result, the modified Lapidus procedure has increased in popularity. Historically, surgeons have followed cautious postoperative protocols, initially restricting weight bearing until bone consolidation is confirmed radiographically. More recently, an alternative approach to postoperative management has been proposed, allowing patients to bear weight as tolerated two weeks after surgery with the goal of improving patient compliance while minimizing postoperative disability. The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes of patients randomized to either early weight bearing or standard non-weight bearing postoperative course following modified Lapidus arthrodesis. Methods: We determined that at least 130 patients would need to be enrolled in this study to achieve statistical significance (p < 0.05). Beginning in 2012, patients with hallux valgus indicated for modified Lapidus arthrodesis were assigned to either the investigational Group A (early weight bearing) or to the control Group B (standard of care) by a random number generator. All patients underwent modified Lapidus arthrodesis by one of the three senior authors (JGA, DRB, JDM). Specific demographic, clinical, patient-centered, and radiographic data were collected during the preoperative visit, the operative procedure, and at defined intervals during the postoperative period. The primary outcome variable was defined as first tarsometatarsal joint fusion at six months. Results: To date, 100 subjects have been enrolled, 57 of whom (40 patients in Group A, 17 patients in Group B) have completed one year of follow up. At six months, 38/40 patients in Group A had achieved radiographic union, compared to 17/17 patients in Group B (p = 0.495). Smoking status, BMI, and age at surgery were not found to be significantly associated with rate of union in either group. Patients in Group A required less time to reach full weight bearing status (p < 0.001). At six weeks after surgery, Group A reported significantly higher levels of physical function and overall composite scores on the SF-36 questionnaire. The rate of adverse events was not significantly different between the two groups at any postoperative timepoint. Conclusion: Though data collection is ongoing, our results indicate that clinical, patient-centered, and radiographic outcomes were comparable following modified Lapidus arthrodesis in both the early weight bearing and standard of care patient groups. Early weight bearing does not appear to increase the rate of adverse events or significantly slow rate of fusion, and also reduces postoperative disability.