Suppr超能文献

扁平足评估中 Bluman 等人分类法与进行性足跖屈畸形分类法的比较。

A comparison between the Bluman et al. and the progressive collapsing foot deformity classifications for flatfeet assessment.

机构信息

Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, 200 Hawkins Dr, John PappaJohn Pavillion (JPP), Room 01066, Lower Level, Iowa City, IA, 52242, USA.

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Rouen University Hospital, 37 Boulevard Gambetta, 76000, Rouen, France.

出版信息

Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2023 Mar;143(3):1331-1339. doi: 10.1007/s00402-021-04279-z. Epub 2021 Dec 3.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Bluman et al., flatfoot classification is based on posterior tibial tendon (PTT) dysfunction leading to a chronological appearance of several foot deformities. An expert consensus recently proposed a new classification named Progressive Collapsing Foot Deformity (PCFD) in which the focus was shifted to five different independent foot and ankle deformities and their flexibility or rigidity. The aim of this study was to compare Bluman and PCFD classifications. We hypothesize that both classifications will be reliable and that the PCFD classification will allow a larger distribution of the different types of foot deformity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective IRB-approved study including 92 flatfeet. Three foot and ankle surgeons reviewed patient files and radiographs to classify each foot using both classifications. Bluman classification was performed one time as initially described and a second time after removing the Angle of Gissane sclerosis sign. Interobserver reliabilities were determined with Fleiss' kappa values.

RESULTS

Interobserver reliabilities of Bluman and PCFD classifications were, respectively, substantial 0.67 and moderate 0.55. PCFD Class C and D reliabilities were, respectively, slight 0.07 and fair 0.28. The 276 readings were spread into 10 substages in Bluman and 65 subclasses in PCFD. The progressivity of the Bluman classification prevented the combination of flexible hindfoot valgus (II Bluman, 1A PCFD), midfoot abduction (IIB, 1B) and medial column instability (IIC, 1C) which was frequent in our study (112/276 readings, 40.6%). By removing the Angle of Gissane sclerosis sign from the Bluman classification, the prevalence of stage III decreased from 44.2 to 10.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

Bluman and PCFD classifications were reliable. The PCFD classification showed a larger distribution of different types of flatfeet but Classes C and D need better definition. The progressivity of Bluman classification causes inconsistencies and Gissane angle sclerosis sign is inappropriately used and might lead to incorrect surgical indications.

摘要

简介

Bluman 等人的扁平足分类基于后胫肌腱(PTT)功能障碍,导致几种足部畸形的出现具有时间顺序。最近,专家共识提出了一种新的分类,称为进行性塌陷性足部畸形(PCFD),其中重点转移到五个不同的独立足部和踝关节畸形及其灵活性或刚性。本研究的目的是比较 Bluman 和 PCFD 分类。我们假设这两种分类都将是可靠的,并且 PCFD 分类将允许更大程度地分布不同类型的足部畸形。

材料和方法

我们进行了一项回顾性 IRB 批准的研究,包括 92 例扁平足。三位足踝外科医生审查了患者的病历和 X 光片,使用这两种分类对每只脚进行分类。Bluman 分类一次按最初描述进行,然后在去除 Gissane 硬化角征后进行第二次。使用 Fleiss'kappa 值确定观察者间可靠性。

结果

Bluman 和 PCFD 分类的观察者间可靠性分别为中度 0.55 和中度 0.67。PCFD 分类 C 和 D 的可靠性分别为轻度 0.07 和公平 0.28。276 次读数分别分布在 Bluman 的 10 个亚期和 PCFD 的 65 个亚类中。Bluman 分类的进行性防止了灵活性后足外翻(Bluman II,PCFD 1A)、中足外展(Bluman IIB,PCFD 1B)和内侧柱不稳定(Bluman IIC,PCFD 1C)的组合,这在我们的研究中很常见(112/276 次读数,占 40.6%)。通过从 Bluman 分类中去除 Gissane 硬化角征,III 期的患病率从 44.2%降至 10.1%。

结论

Bluman 和 PCFD 分类是可靠的。PCFD 分类显示出不同类型扁平足的更大分布,但 C 类和 D 类需要更好的定义。Bluman 分类的进行性导致了不一致,Gissane 角硬化征被不恰当地使用,可能导致不正确的手术指征。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验