Percutaneous Chevron/Akin (PECA) versus open scarf/Akin (SA) osteotomy treatment for hallux valgus: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Gabriel Ferraz Ferreira, Vinícius Quadros Borges, Leonardo Vinícius de Matos Moraes and Kelly Cristina Stéfani

PLOS ONE, 2021, vol. 16, issue 2, 1-13

Abstract: Purpose: The objective of the study is to compare the radiographic and clinical results of two techniques for the treatment of hallux valgus that have the same indication, the open scarf/Akin (SA) technique and the percutaneous Chevron/Akin (PECA). Methods: A meta-analysis was performed with the studies found during a systematic review of articles included in electronic databases until 30 May 2020. The pooled analysis was summarized according to clinical outcomes, such as visual analog pain scale (VAS) and American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, radiographic outcomes and complications, with a 95% confidence interval. Results: Three studies comparing the open scarf/Akin (SA) versus the PECA techniques were added to the analysis, corresponding to 235 feet, 102 in the PECA group and 133 in the SA. The final mean difference in the hallux valgus angle was 0.80 degrees and in the intermetatarsal angle 0.53, in the last radiographic evaluation. In the AOFAS score, the final mean difference was 4.97 points and in the VAS 0.14 in relation to the last clinical evaluation. Exposure to radiation during the surgical procedure was higher in the PECA group with a mean of 35.53 seconds. Conclusions: The PECA surgical technique for the treatment of hallux valgus when compared with SA demonstrated similar radiographic correction, pain and function after six months of follow-up but with a longer radiation exposure time. Register of systematic review (PROSPERO): CRD42018096613.

Date: 2021
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0242496 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 42496&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0242496

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242496

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().