Outcomes following minimally invasive dorsal cheilectomy for hallux rigidus: A systematic review

Table 3 Summary of clinical and functional outcomes, complications, failures and secondary surgical procedures

Ref.	Patients (n)	Feet (n)	PROM	Score		1st MTPJ ROM (°)		Complications	Failures	Secondary surgical procedures
				Preop	Postop	Preop	Postop
Glenn et al[4], 2021	20	20	VAS	7.1	0.8	47	67	0	0	0
Hickey et al[5], 2020	36	36	AOFAS	66.6	n/r	31.9	72.7	EHL rupture = 1, neuropathic pain = 3, joint stiffness = 1	0	Repeat arthroscopic cheilectomy = 1, manipulation under anaesthetic = 3
Levaj et al[6], 2021	29	29	n/r			0	0	Joint stiffness = 1	1	Open revision = 1
Pastides et al[7], 2014	41	54	AOFAS	71.1	87.1	39	48	Neuropathic pain = 2	2	MTPJ fusion = 2
Stevens et al[8], 2020	133	133	n/r			0	0	EHL rupture = 1, neuropathic pain = 3, superficial wound problems = 2, joint stiffness/pain = 7, ectopic bone in wound = 2	17	MTPJ arthrodesis = 9, open cheilectomy = 3, MIS cheilectomy-2, interposition arthroplasty = 1, hallux valgus correction = 2
Teoh et al[9], 2019	89	98	VAS	8	3	11.3	69.1	Neuropathic pain = 4, superficial wound problems = 2, wound infection = 2	12	Repeat cheilectomy = 4, open removal of loose bone = 1, 1st MTPJ arthrodesis = 7

VAS: Visual analog scale; AOFAS: American orthopedic foot and ankle society; Preop: Preoperative; Postop: Postoperative; EHL: Extensor hallucis longus; MTPJ: Metatarsophalangeal joint; PROM: Patient reported outcome measurement; ROM: Range of motion; n/r: Not report; MIS: Minimally invasive surgery.