Outcomes of Idiopathic Flexible Flatfoot Deformity Reconstruction in the Young Patient.
Academic Article
Overview
abstract
BACKGROUND: Operative correction of flatfoot deformity has been well studied in the older population. There is a subset of younger patients without congenital foot deformity that also develop a collapsing flatfoot. However, assessment of outcomes across age groups is limited, especially in the young demographic. The purpose of our study was to compare operative outcomes of flatfoot reconstruction between these 2 age groups. METHODS: Seventy-six feet (41 left, 35 right) in 71 patients who underwent flexible flatfoot reconstruction were divided into 2 groups based on age: ≤30 years (n = 22) and >30 years (n = 54). Exclusion criteria included congenital causes of flatfoot (tarsal coalition, vertical talus, overcorrected clubfoot). Average age was 20.8 years (range, 14-30) and 55.4 years (range, 35-74) in the younger and older cohorts, respectively. Preoperative and minimum 2-year postoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information Systems (PROMIS) scores were compared. Five radiographic parameters were assessed pre- and postoperatively: talonavicular coverage angle, lateral talo-first metatarsal angle, lateral talocalcaneal angle, calcaneal pitch, and hindfoot moment arm. Procedures performed and incidence of minor (removal of symptomatic hardware) and major (revision) reoperations were compared. RESULTS: Younger patients were less likely to undergo flexor digitorum longus transfer, first tarsometatarsal fusion, spring ligament repair, and posterior tibial tendon repair (all P < .05). Both younger and older cohorts demonstrated significant improvement in multiple PROMIS domains at an average follow-up of 30.6 (range, 24-44) and 26.8 (range, 24-45) months, respectively (P = .07). Younger patients demonstrated significantly higher pre- and postoperative Physical Function (mean difference postoperatively, 4.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-7.8; P = .03). There were no differences in radiographic parameters postoperatively. There were 8 (36.4%) reoperations (all minor) in the younger group, and 21 (38.9%) reoperations (6 major, 15 minor) in the older group (P = .84). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that age may play a role in clinical outcomes, procedures indicated, and subsequent corrective reoperations. Younger patients maintained greater physical function with comparable radiographic correction, with less frequent indication for tendon transfers, arthrodesis, and additional corrective surgeries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative study.
