Moje First Metatarsophalangeal Replacement—A Case Series with Functional Outcomes Using the AOFAS-HMI Score

Total Arthroplasty of the Metatarsophalangeal Joint of the Hallux

“…Although recent MTP-I prosthetic designs have a large theoretical ROM, clinical follow-up found moderate to disappointing ROM, 4,27 which agrees with our results. Comparison with our results is difficult because other studies used a goniometer to measure ROM, which is not accurate because of interference with the interphalangeal joint and soft tissues around the first metatarsal.…”

Second-Generation Ceramic First Metatarsophalangeal Joint Replacement for Hallux Rigidus

“…2,12,17,27,29 Nevertheless, some studies with shorter follow-up showed similar mean AOFAS scores as the present study (Table 2). 6,23 Although some studies with short-term follow-up have shown a low frequency of revision, 11,15,17 studies with longer follow-up have shown higher frequency of revision, consistent with the present results (Table 2). 23,26 Therefore, longer follow-up is needed to evaluate the long-term implant survival of first MP joint replacement.…”

“…The present study has the longest follow-up of all studies with this prosthesis to date ( Table 2). Previous studies with this prosthesis have included 13 case series (Table 2), 2,3,6,8,11,12,15,17,21,23,26,27,29 2 abstracts, 10,19 and 2 case reports, 13,28 and 3 previous studies have evaluated the outcome of revision procedures 32,33 or lesser toe replacement surgery 34 with this type of prosthesis.…”

Hemiarthroplasty Versus Total Joint Arthroplasty for Hallux Rigidus: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

“…Implant arthroplasty has been associated with many implant-related complications, including implant subsidence, implant fracture, loosening, subluxation, and dislocation, 32-34 though none of these complications were reported by any of the included studies. This review found a higher overall complication rate in total joint arthroplasty compared with hemiarthroplasty (osteolysis, 6.6%; bone resorption, 12.6%); however, a single study by Fieschi et al 16 can account for this difference.…”