Á¦1 ÁßÁ·°ñ ±ÙÀ§ ¹Ý¿ùÇü Àý°ñ¼ú°ú Ludloff Àý°ñ¼ú ÈÄ ±³Á¤ °¢µµ¿¡ µû¸¥ Àý°ñÆí°£ Á¢ÃË ¸éÀû ºñ±³(¿¹ºñº¸°í)
Comparison of the Contact Area between Three Different Correcting Angles after Proximal Crescentic Osteotomy and Ludloff Osteotomy of the First Metatarsal (Preliminary Report)
´ëÇÑÁ·ºÎÁ·°üÀýÇÐȸÁö 2010³â 14±Ç 1È£ p.5 ~ p.10
¹Ú¿ë¿í:Park Yong-Wook
Àå±ÙÁ¾:Chang Keun-Jong/¹Ú»óÈ£:Park Sang-Ho
Abstract
Purpose: This study was performed to compare the contact area between three different correcting angles after the proximal crescentic and Ludloff osteotomies of the first metatarsal.
Materials and Methods: We used the two sawbone models. Proximal crescentic (PCO) and Ludloff osteotomies (LO) were performed and secured using K-wires under the correcting intermetatarsal angle (IMA) 5¡Æ, 10¡Æ, and 15¡Æ. Then each 6 osteotomized model was scanned five times and measured the contact area using the calculating program. We excluded the highest and lowest values.
Results: The mean area of cutting surface was 189 mm2 in PCO, 863 mm2 in LO. The mean contact area (contact ratio; contact area ¡¿100/area of cutting surface) of PCO was 149 mm2 (79%) in 5¡Æ, 139.5 mm2 (74%) in 10¡Æ, 107 mm2 (57%) in 15¡Æ IMA. The mean contact area (contact ratio) of LO was 711 mm2 (82%) in 5¡Æ, 535.5 mm2 (62%) in 10¡Æ, 330 mm2 (38%) in 15¡Æ IMA.
Conclusion: A significant decrease in the contact area and contact ratio according to increase in correcting IMA was noticed in LO. We recommend the PCO rather than LO, when the IMA is needed to correct over 15¡Æ.
Å°¿öµå
Hallux valgus, First metatarsal, Proximal crescentic osteotomy, Ludloff osteotomy, Contact area
KMID :
1130920100140010005
¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸
µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸
À¯È¿¼º°á°ú(Recomendation)
The finding of this study recommended the PCO rather than LO, when the IMA is needed to correct over 15¡Æ.