Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 13, 2025
An Anatomical Study of Nerves at Risk During Minimally Invasive Hallux Valgus Surgery
Published on: February 17, 2018
Chevron osteotomy and scarf osteotomy for hallux valgus angle and intermetatarsal angle correction: a systematic
Yu-Ning Peng1,2, Yu-Hsiang Peng3, Carl P C Chen4,5
1Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, College of Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Linkou, Chang Gung University, 5, Fu-Hsin St., Kwei-Shan, Tao-Yuan, 333343, Taiwan.
Background:
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the differences in hallux valgus angle (HVA), intermetatarsal angle (IMA), American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) scores, and complication rates between chevron osteotomy and scarf osteotomy for correcting hallux valgus.
Methods:
Two investigators independently searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published from 2007 to 2018 on PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. Next, chevron and scarf osteotomies were compared for their postoperative outcomes using HVA, IMA, and AOFAS scores and their complication rates. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager (version 5.3).
Results:
Six RCTs-comprising 507 feet, of which 261 and 246 underwent chevron and scarf osteotomies, respectively-were included. The meta-analysis revealed that chevron osteotomy led to significantly smaller postoperative HVAs than scarf osteotomy (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -1.94, 95% CI = - 2.65 to - 1.29, P < .00001). However, the differences in postoperative IMA (WMD = - 0.44, 95% CI = - 1.10 to 0.22, P = .19), postoperative AOFAS scores (WMD = 0.75; 95% CI = - 5.32 to 6.82; P = .81), and complication rates (risk ratio = 1.22, 95% CI = 0.65-2.27, P = .53) between feet that underwent chevron and scarf osteotomies were nonsignificant.
Conclusions:
Compared with scarf osteotomy, chevron osteotomy had significantly more favorable postoperative outcomes in terms of HVA correction, but not in terms of IMA, AOFAS scores, or complication rates.
Level Of Evidence:
Level I, systemic review and meta-analysis.
