0
Scientific Articles   |    
An Association Between Functional Second Metatarsal Length and Midfoot Arthrosis
James S. Davitt, MD1; Nancy Kadel, MD2; Bruce J. Sangeorzan, MD2; Sigvard T. HansenJr., MD2; Sarah K. Holt, MPH2; Emily Donaldson-Fletcher, BA3
1 Orthopedic and Fracture Clinic, 11782 S.W. Barnes Road, Suite 300, Portland, OR 97225. E-mail address: james.davitt@providence.org
2 Department of Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine, University of Washington, Harborview Medical Center, Box 359798, 325 Ninth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104. E-mail address for N. Kadel: kadel@u.washington.edu. E-mail address for B.J. Sangeorzan: bsangeor@u.washington.edu. E-mail address for S.T. Hansen Jr.: jegrant@u.washington.edu. E-mail address for S.K. Holt: sholt@u.washington.edu
3 E-mail address: donaldea@whitman.edu
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery.  2005; 87:795-800  doi:10.2106/JBJS.C.01238
5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case

Abstract

Background: Primary tarsometatarsal arthrosis is relatively uncommon. The etiology of osteoarthritis in the foot is poorly understood, and it is possible that mechanical or anatomic factors play a role.

Methods: We compared the relative length of the metatarsals in patients with idiopathic arthrosis of the midfoot with that in a group of controls without arthrosis. We analyzed the radiographs of all patients who had had an arthrodesis of the first, second, and third tarsometatarsal joints to treat arthrosis during a three-year period at a tertiary teaching hospital. We excluded patients with a history of inflammatory arthritis, trauma, or Charcot arthropathy. Nine patients (fifteen feet), seven women and two men with an average age of 64.2 years, met the inclusion criteria. We compared them with a control group consisting of the uninjured feet of patients with an acute traumatic injury to the hindfoot and the feet of volunteers with no foot problems. We measured the first, second, and fourth metatarsal lengths and the intermetatarsal angles on weight-bearing anteroposterior radiographs. We also measured the length of the first metatarsal relative to the long axis of the second metatarsal to define the functional first metatarsal length. The ratios of metatarsal lengths and the ratios of functional lengths were used for analysis to minimize differences in foot size and differences caused by radiographic magnification. Statistical comparisons between groups were then carried out.

Results: In the study group, the length of the first metatarsal was, on the average, 77.0% of the length of the second metatarsal, whereas, in the control group, the first metatarsal length was an average of 82.0% of the second metatarsal length. The functional length of the second metatarsal was, on the average, 18.6% greater than that of the first metatarsal in the study group and only an average of 4.1% greater than that of the first metatarsal in the control group. Both differences were significant (p < 0.0004 and p < 0.0001, respectively).

Conclusions: Patients with midfoot arthrosis had a different ratio of the first to the second metatarsal length than did a similarly aged cohort without midfoot arthrosis. The patients had a relatively short first metatarsal or a relatively long second metatarsal, or both. Midfoot arthrosis may have a mechanical etiology. Recognition of risk factors is the first step in developing prevention strategies.

Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Figures in this Article
    Sign In to Your Personal ProfileSign In To Access Full Content
    Not a Subscriber?
    Get online access for 30 days for $30
    New to JBJS?
    Sign up for a full subscription to both the print and online editions
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities, to comment on public articles, or to sign up for alerts.
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities
    Have a subscription to the print edition?
    Current subscribers to The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery in either the print or quarterly DVD formats receive free online access to JBJS.org.
    Forgot your password?
    Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.

     
    Forgot your username or need assistance? Please contact customer service at subs@jbjs.org. If your access is provided
    by your institution, please contact you librarian or administrator for username and password information. Institutional
    administrators, to reset your institution's master username or password, please contact subs@jbjs.org
    Accreditation Statement
    These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
    CME Activities Associated with This Article
    Submit a Comment
    Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
    Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

    * = Required Field
    (if multiple authors, separate names by comma)
    Example: John Doe




    Robert Poss MD
    Posted on July 07, 2005
    Editor's Note
    Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery

    The corresponding author has been invited to respond to the letter by Dr. Wallace and to date, has not done so.

    George F. Wallace
    Posted on June 13, 2005
    A Question About the Exclusion Criteria For this Study
    University Hospital-UMDNJ, Newark, NJ 07103

    To the Editor:

    In the article "An Association Between Functional Second Metatarsal Length and Midfoot Arthrosis", the authors state that no trauma patients were included in their series. However, upon inspection of their Figure 2, there appears to be a step off (malalignment) at the medial borders of the second and intermediate cuneiform respectively. This would signify a Lisfranc fracture dislocation, albeit subtly. The arthrosis then would be from a traumatic event and hence should not have been included in the study population.

    One can argue that the step off is an anatomical "variant" but information about the other foot is lacking. Likewise, no other views of the same foot or CT scans are mentioned or depicted which could be used to definitively make the diagnosis of a Lisfranc injury and the sequela of arthrosis of the second metatarsal intermediate cuneiform articulation.

    At the least, the choice of inserting Figure 2 could be confusing to the reader and does not appear to match their exclusion criteria. I look forward to the authors' comments.

    Sincerely,

    George F. Wallace, DPM, MBA

    Director, Podiatry Service

    University Hospital-University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey

    150 Bergen Street, A-226

    Newark, NJ 07103

    Related Articles
    Related Cases
    Related Content
    Topic Collections
    Related Audio and Videos
    Clinical Trials
    Readers of This Also Read...
    jbjs jobs
    12/22/2011
    VA - Charleston Area Medical Center
    12/22/2011
    ME - Central Maine Medical Center