Fusion Versus Joint-Sparing Reconstruction for Patients With Flexible Flatfoot

Abstract

Aims Passively correctible, adult-acquired flatfoot deformities (AAFD) are treated with joint-sparing procedures. Questions remain as to the efficacy of such procedures when clinical deformities are severe. In severe deformities, a primary fusion may lead to predictable outcomes, but risks nonunion. We evaluated pre- and postsurgical flexible AAFD patients undergoing joint-sparing or fusion procedures, comparing reoperation and complication rates. Methods We identified patients with flexible AAFD between January 1, 2001 and 2016. Exclusion criteria were incomplete medical record, rigid AAFD, and prior flatfoot surgery. Patient demographics, pre- and postsurgical radiographic measurements, surgery performed, and postoperative complications were evaluated by bivariate analysis, comparing joint-sparing versus fusion procedures. Results Of 239 patients (255 feet) (mean follow-up 62 ± 50 months), 209 (87%) underwent joint-sparing reconstructions, 30 (12.6%) underwent fusions. Fifty-four (24.1%) feet underwent joint-sparing reconstruction with reoperation versus 11 (35.5%) in fusion patients ( P = .17). Radiographic improvement in talonavicular angle, talar first-metatarsal (anteroposterior view), and Meary’s angle was higher in fusion patients ( P < .001, P < .001, and P = .003, respectively). Discussion More nonunion reoperations among fusion patients were offset by reoperations in joint-sparing patients. Fusion uniquely corrected Meary’s angle. Nonunion is of less concern for joint-sparing versus fusion for patients with severe flexible AAFD. Degree of deformity versus advantage of joint motion should improve decision making. Levels of Evidence: Level IV: Retrospective case series