Prospective Study of Minimally Invasive Lapidus Procedure for Hallux Valgus Deformities

August 21, 2024 updated by: Alastair Younger, St. Paul's Hospital, Canada

A Prospective Study of the Minimally Invasive Lapidus Procedure for Hallux Valgus Deformities Randomized With Arthroscopy or No Arthroscopy at St. Paul's Hospital in Vancouver, Canada

The Lapidus procedure corrects bunions, a condition called hallux first ray deformity. Using minimally invasive surgery (MIS) to perform this procedure on patients with hallux valgus deformity is a newer approach. Because it's newer, there is not studies on how patients feel about it directly through patient reported outcomes (PROMs), which involve patients filling out questionnaires. Previous studies have looked at information that could be gathered from radiographs. This study looks specifically at how well bones heal after the MIS procedure and how patients feel about it based on their recorded responses in PROMs. The Lapidus procedure involves a step where the surgeon checks for the amount of cartilage removal, which can be done by inserting a mini camera into the joint (arthroscopically) or through a small incision for visual inspection. These two methods of checking cartilage removal are the two treatment groups for this study that patients are randomly assigned to.

The main goals of the study are as follows:

  • To determine healing in minimally invasive Lapidus. Evaluated by bones fusing together at 12 weeks post-operation.
  • To determine patient reported outcomes following Lapidus procedures
  • To determine the relationship between patient-reported outcomes and percent bone healing.
  • To assess the nonunion (bone not fusing together) rate and re-operation rate following Lapidus procedures
  • To assess the correction achieved on radiographic and standing CT measurements.
  • To compare radiographic and Standing CT assessment of hallux valgus deformity and correction after surgery.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

58

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Contact Backup

Study Locations

    • British Columbia
      • Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, V6Z 1Y6

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • The subject is at least 19 years of age.
  • The subject is considered to be skeletally mature.
  • The subject is undergoing an isolated 1st TMT, which may or may not include concomitant procedures, such as:

    • Soft tissue realignment
    • Heel cord lengthening
    • Akin osteotomy
    • Lesser toe osteotomies or claw toe correction
  • The subject is able to comply with all post-operative evaluations and visits.
  • The subject is able to provide informed consent.
  • The subject consents to and will receive either arthroscopy or no arthroscopy condition using the PROstep MIS 5mm Chamfer Screw.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients indicated for TMT fusion for non-hallux valgus procedures.
  • Patients with simultaneous fusion of second and third ray.
  • Patients indicated for navicular-cuneiform joint performed at the same time.
  • The subject has:

    • Arthritis in the affected joint
    • Severe osteoporosis
    • Neuromuscular impairment
    • Prior or current infection in the affected joint
    • Charcot foot
  • The subject has undergone previous fusion surgery of the proposed site (i.e., revision of failed fusion attempt).
  • The subject will be undergoing an ankle replacement, any other concomitant fusion(s), or any lesser metatarsal osteotomies in the affected foot or ankle in the same sitting.
  • The subject has concomitant injury, which in the opinion of the Investigator, is likely to impair functions for as long as or longer than the recovery from the subject's 1st TMT fusion.
  • The subject is deemed morbidly obese (BMI > 50 kg/m2
  • The subject has a major risk factor for non-union (ex. poorly controlled diabetes, current smoker).
  • There is radiographic evidence of bone cysts, segmental defects or growth plate fracture around the fusion site that may negatively impact bony fusion. The patient currently has untreated malignant neoplasm(s), or is currently undergoing radio- or chemotherapy or has been diagnosed with hypercalcemia.
  • The subject is known to be pregnant during the study period.
  • The Investigator judges the subject to be unable or unlikely to remain compliant to follow-up due to a physical or mental condition (ex. currently being treated for a psychiatric disorder, senile dementia, Alzheimer's disease, etc.).
  • The subject is unable to provide informed consent.
  • The subject is unable to communicate with the research team.
  • The subject is unable to comply with follow-up.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Arthroscopy
Using arthroscopy in minimally invasive lapidus procedure is the current standard of care. However a new screw is used (PROstep MIS 5mm Chamfer Screw). The new hardware is expected to be substantially equivalent to standard of care.
After removal of the cartilage with the cartilage burr, a 3.0 arthroscope will be inserted to inspect the joint for all cartilage removal. Any residual cartilage pieces will be removed to ensure complete cartilage debridement from the subchondral bone and fragments removed from the joint.
Other Names:
  • With scope
Experimental: No Arthroscopy
Non-Arthroscopic Mini Arthrotomy Procedure (research-specific): Surgical procedure between the two treatment groups are equivalent except at the step of checking cartilage removal. After use of the cartilage burr the surgeon will make a small dorsal portal and use this to ensure that the cartilage is removed and all debris removed. The incision will be 2 cm long and centered over the dorsal medial aspect of the joint. The Principal Investigator wants to know if the mini arthrotomy procedure is as effective as the control because this procedure is faster and easier to perform.
The two procedures, with and without arthroscopy, only differ by the method of assessing cartilage removal. Cartilage removal will be assessed arthroscopically in the procedure with arthroscopy. In the procedure without arthroscopy, cartilage removal will be assessed via direct visualization through a mini arthrotomy procedure. After use of the cartilage burr the surgeon will make a small dorsal portal and use this opening to ensure that the cartilage is removed and all debris removed. The incision will be 2 cm long and centered over the dorsal medial aspect of the joint.
Other Names:
  • No arthroscopy
  • MIS no arthroscopy
  • mini arthrotomy

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Primary: Bone Fusion
Time Frame: At 12 weeks post-operation
Rate of bone fusion by comparing the mean percentage of the joint fused at Week 12 using LineUp scans
At 12 weeks post-operation

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Secondary: Questionnaires-Musculoskeletal Outcomes Data Evaluation and Management System (MODEMS)
Time Frame: Pre-operative, and at all post-operative followups (2 Weeks, 6 Weeks, 12 Weeks, 52 Weeks)
Patient reported outcomes as measured by MODEMS (includes AOS and SF-36) compared to baseline questionnaire.
Pre-operative, and at all post-operative followups (2 Weeks, 6 Weeks, 12 Weeks, 52 Weeks)
Secondary: Questionnaires-Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM)
Time Frame: Pre-operative, and at all post-operative followups (2 Weeks, 6 Weeks, 12 Weeks, 52 Weeks)
Patient reported outcomes as measured by FAAM compared to baseline questionnaire.
Pre-operative, and at all post-operative followups (2 Weeks, 6 Weeks, 12 Weeks, 52 Weeks)
Secondary: Questionnaires-Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS)
Time Frame: Pre-operative, and at all post-operative followups (2 Weeks, 6 Weeks, 12 Weeks, 52 Weeks)
Patient reported outcomes as measured by PCS compared to baseline questionnaire.
Pre-operative, and at all post-operative followups (2 Weeks, 6 Weeks, 12 Weeks, 52 Weeks)
Secondary: Re-operation and complication rates
Time Frame: At any point during enrolment up to 52 weeks post-operation.
Reoperations and complications will be recorded
At any point during enrolment up to 52 weeks post-operation.

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Collaborators

Investigators

  • Principal Investigator: Alastair Younger, University of British Columbia

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Estimated)

October 1, 2024

Primary Completion (Estimated)

October 1, 2026

Study Completion (Estimated)

May 1, 2027

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

May 14, 2024

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 21, 2024

First Posted (Actual)

August 26, 2024

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

August 26, 2024

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

August 21, 2024

Last Verified

August 1, 2024

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • H23-03971

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

UNDECIDED

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

Yes

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

Yes

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Hallux Valgus and Bunion

Clinical Trials on Minimally invasive lapidus procedure with arthroscopy

Subscribe