Display options
Cite
Baba AN, Bhat JA, Paljor S, et al. Mitchell's osteotomy in the management of hallux valgus: An Indian perspective. Indian J Orthop. 2009;43(1):76-81doi: 10.4103/0019-5413.45327.
Baba, A. N., Bhat, J. A., Paljor, S., Mir, N. A., & Majid, S. (2009). Mitchell's osteotomy in the management of hallux valgus: An Indian perspective. Indian journal of orthopaedics, 43(1), 76-81. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.45327
Baba, Asif Nazir, et al. "Mitchell's osteotomy in the management of hallux valgus: An Indian perspective." Indian journal of orthopaedics vol. 43,1 (2009): 76-81. doi: https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.45327
Baba AN, Bhat JA, Paljor S, Mir NA, Majid S. Mitchell's osteotomy in the management of hallux valgus: An Indian perspective. Indian J Orthop. 2009 Jan;43(1):76-81. doi: 10.4103/0019-5413.45327. PMID: 19753185; PMCID: PMC2739490.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Indian J Orthop. 2009 Jan;43(1):76-81. doi: 10.4103/0019-5413.45327.

Mitchell's osteotomy in the management of hallux valgus: An Indian perspective.

Indian journal of orthopaedics

Asif Nazir Baba, Javid Ahmed Bhat, Sd Paljor, Naseer Ahmed Mir, Suhail Majid

Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics, SKIMS Medical College, Bemina, Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India.

PMID: 19753185 PMCID: PMC2739490 DOI: 10.4103/0019-5413.45327

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Hallux valgus is a common condition that affects the forefoot. A large number of procedures are described for managing this condition. Mitchell's osteotomy and its modifications are being widely used for treating hallux valgus. However, most of the studies describe the results from the developed world. We present results of the classic Mitchell's osteotomy in hallux valgus in Indian subcontinent.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty eight adult patients (including 12 bilateral ones) in the age range of 18-60 years with hallux valgus were managed with the classic Mitchell's osteotomy. Pain over the bunion was the reason for surgery in 53 of 60 feet and cosmesis in the remaining 7 feet. Patients with hallux valgus angle more than 20 degrees and not responding to a trial of conservative treatment were included. Patients having metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint osteoarthritis (Grade II and higher), hallux rigidus, rheumatoid arthritis, and with subluxation of MTP joint were excluded from the study. Further, patients with first metatarsal more than 3 mm shorter than second metatarsal were also excluded.

RESULTS: The average follow-up period is 3 yrs (range 18months - 6yrs). About 55 feet (83%) were painless after surgery. Forty-two (70%) patients were happy with the cosmetic results of the surgery. Metatarsalgia was the reason for dissatisfaction with the procedure in five patients. The average correction of hallux valgus and the intermetatarsal angles achieved was 19.7 degrees and 6.9 degrees , respectively. Using the Broughton and Winson scoring system, 37 (61.7%) feet had excellent results, 18 (30%) had good, and five (8.3%) feet had a poor results.

CONCLUSION: The classic Mitchell's procedure is a simple procedure and gives good cosmetic and radiological results.

Keywords: Bunion; Mitchell's osteotomy; hallux valgus; metatarsalgia

References

  1. Orthopedics. 1990 Sep;13(9):1001-7 - PubMed
  2. Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 1989 Jan;6(1):1-15 - PubMed
  3. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1968 Oct;50(7):1353-67 - PubMed
  4. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979 Jul-Aug;(142):24-9 - PubMed
  5. Acta Orthop Scand. 1974;45(2):271-95 - PubMed
  6. Foot Ankle. 1983 Jan-Feb;3(4):189-96 - PubMed
  7. Acta Orthop Belg. 2001 Apr;67(2):149-56 - PubMed
  8. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 1998 Oct 10;118(24):3765-7 - PubMed
  9. Acta Orthop Scand. 1988 Jun;59(3):307-9 - PubMed
  10. Foot Ankle Int. 2008 Jun;29(6):606-12 - PubMed
  11. Foot Ankle. 1990 Feb;10(4):201-5 - PubMed
  12. Orthopedics. 2005 Oct;28(10):1155-6 - PubMed
  13. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1974 Jul;56(5):923-31 - PubMed
  14. Foot Ankle Int. 1994 Mar;15(3):103-6 - PubMed
  15. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2005 Dec;13(3):245-52 - PubMed
  16. Orthopedics. 1997 Mar;20(3):253-7 - PubMed
  17. Singapore Med J. 1998 Dec;39(12):547-50 - PubMed
  18. Ann Chir. 1993;47(9):894-9 - PubMed
  19. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1958 Oct;40-A(5):1058-62 - PubMed
  20. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1999 Jul;81(4):621-4 - PubMed
  21. Br Med J. 1965 Jun 26;1(5451):1648-50 - PubMed
  22. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1958 Jan;40-A(1):41-58; discussion 59-60 - PubMed
  23. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992 Jan;74(1):137-9 - PubMed
  24. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1980 May;62-B(2):188-91 - PubMed
  25. S Afr Med J. 1980 Mar 8;57(10):355-7 - PubMed

Publication Types