Background: The importance of the rotational profile of the first metatarsal is increasingly recognized in the surgical planning of hallux valgus. However, rotation in the normal population has only been measured in small series. We aimed to identify the normal range of first metatarsal rotation in a large series using weightbearing computed tomography (WBCT). Methods: WBCT scans were retrospectively analyzed for 182 normal feet (91 patients). Hallux valgus angle, intermetatarsal angle, anteroposterior/lateral talus–first metatarsal angle, calcaneal pitch, and hindfoot alignment angle were measured using digitally reconstructed radiographs. Patients with abnormal values for any of these measures and those with concomitant pathology, previous surgery, or hallux rigidus were excluded. Final assessment was performed on 126 feet. Metatarsal pronation (MPA) and α angles were measured on standardized coronal computed tomography slices. Pronation was recorded as positive. Intraobserver and interobserver reliability were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Results: Mean MPA was 5.5 ± 5.1 (range, –6 to 25) degrees, and mean α angle was 6.9 ± 5.5 (range, –5 to 22) degrees. When considering the normal range as within 2 standard deviations of the mean, the normal range identified was −5 to 16 degrees for MPA and −4 to 18 degrees for α angle. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability were excellent for both MPA (ICC = 0.80 and 0.97, respectively) and α angle (ICC = 0.83 and 0.95, respectively). There was a moderate positive correlation between MPA and α angle (Pearson coefficient 0.68, P < .001). Conclusion: Metatarsal rotation is variable in normal feet. Normal MPA can be defined as less than 16 degrees, and normal α angle can be defined as less than 18 degrees. Both MPA and α angle are reproducible methods for assessing rotation. Further work is needed to evaluate these angles in patients with deformity and to determine their significance when planning surgical correction of hallux valgus. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Background: Failure to identify and correct malrotation of the first metatarsal may lead to recurrent hallux valgus deformity. We aimed to identify the proportion of hallux valgus patients with increased first metatarsal pronation using weightbearing computed tomography (WBCT) and to identify the relationship with conventional radiographic measurements. Methods: WBCT scans were analyzed for 102 feet with a hallux valgus angle (HVA) and intermetatarsal angle (IMA) greater than or equal to 16 and 9 degrees, respectively. Metatarsal pronation angle (MPA), alpha angle, sesamoid rotation angle (SRA), and sesamoid position were measured on standardized coronal WBCT slices. Pronation was recorded as positive. Hindfoot alignment angle (HAA) was assessed using dedicated software. Pearson correlation and multiple regression analyses were used to assess differences between groups. Results: Mean HVA was 29.8±9.4 degrees and mean IMA was 14.1±3.7 degrees. Mean MPA was 11.9±5.8 (range 0-26) degrees and mean alpha angle was 11.9±6.8 (range −3 to 29) degrees. In a previous study, we demonstrated the upper limit of normal MPA as 16 degrees and alpha angle as 18 degrees. Based on these criteria, we identified abnormal metatarsal pronation in 32 feet (31.4%). We found a strong positive correlation between SRA and HVA/IMA ( R = 0.67/0.60, respectively, P < .001). IMA and HAA weakly correlated with MPA and alpha angle (IMA: R = 0.26/0.27, respectively, P < .01; HAA: R = 0.26/0.27, respectively, P < .01). Regression analyses suggested that increasing IMA was the most significant radiographic predictor of increased pronation. In this cohort, there was no correlation between HVA or sesamoid position and MPA / alpha angle (HVA: P = .36/.12, respectively, sesamoid position, P = .86/.77, respectively). Conclusion: In this cohort of 102 feet that met plain radiographic criteria for hallux valgus deformity, first metatarsal pronation was found abnormal in 31.4% of patients. We found a weak association between the IMA and hindfoot valgus, but not the HVA.

Background Recurrence after surgical correction of hallux valgus may be related to coronal rotation of the first metatarsal. The scarf osteotomy is a commonly used procedure for correcting hallux valgus but has limited ability to correct rotation. Using weight-bearing computed tomography (WBCT), we aimed to measure the coronal rotation of the first metatarsal before and after a scarf osteotomy, and correlate these to clinical outcome scores. Methods We retrospectively analyzed 16 feet (15 patients) who had a WBCT before and after scarf osteotomy for hallux valgus correction. On both scans, hallux valgus angle (HVA), intermetatarsal angle (IMA), and anteroposterior/lateral talus-first metatarsal angle were measured using digitally reconstructed radiographs. Metatarsal pronation angle (MPA), alpha angle, sesamoid rotation angle, and sesamoid position were measured on standardized coronal WBCT slices. Preoperative and postoperative (12 mo) clinical outcome scores (Manchester Oxford Foot Questionnaire and Visual Analogue Scores) were captured. Results Mean HVA was 28.6 ± 10.1° preoperatively and 12.1 ± 7.7° postoperatively (P < .001). Mean IMA was 13.7 ± 3.8° preoperatively and 7.5 ± 3.0° postoperatively (P < .001). Before and after surgery, there were no significant differences in MPA (11.4 ± 7.7 and 11.4 ± 9.9°, respectively; P = .75) or alpha angle (10.9 ± 8.0 and 10.7 ± 13.1°, respectively; P = .83). There were significant improvements in sesamoid rotation angle (SRA) (26.4 ± 10.2 and 15.7 ± 10.2°, respectively; P = .03) and sesamoid position (1.4 ± 1.0 and 0.6 ± 0.6, respectively; P = .04) after a scarf osteotomy. There were significant improvements in all outcome scores after surgery. Poorer outcome scores correlated with greater postoperative MPA and alpha angles (r = .76 (P = .02) and .67 (P = .03), respectively). Conclusion A scarf osteotomy does not correct first metatarsal coronal rotation, and worse outcomes are linked to greater postoperative metatarsal rotation. Rotation of the metatarsal needs to be measured and considered when planning hallux valgus surgery. Further work was needed to compare postoperative outcomes with rotational osteotomies and modified Lapidus procedures when addressing rotation. Level of Evidence: 4

Background: Weightbearing computed tomography (WBCT) can be used to assess alignment and rotation of the first metatarsal. It is unknown whether these measures remain consistent on sequential WBCTs in the same patient when a patient’s standing position may be different. The aim of this study was to establish the repeatability (test-retest) of measurements of first metatarsal alignment and rotation in patients without forefoot pathology on WBCT. Methods: We retrospectively identified 42 feet in 26 patients with sequential WBCT studies less than 12 months apart. Patients with surgery between scans, previous forefoot surgery or hallux rigidus were excluded. Hallux valgus angle (HVA) and intermetatarsal angle (IMA) were measured using digitally reconstructed radiographs. Two methods of calculating metatarsal rotation (metatarsal pronation angle [MPA] and alpha angle) were measured on standardized coronal CT slices. Interobserver agreement and test-retest repeatability were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimally detectable change (MDC95) were calculated. Results: Interobserver agreement was excellent for HVA and IMA (ICC 0.96 and 0.90, respectively) and was good for MPA and alpha angle (ICC 0.81 and 0.80, respectively). There was excellent test-retest repeatability for HVA (ICC=0.90) and good test-retest repeatability for IMA (ICC=0.77). There was excellent test-retest repeatability for MPA (ICC=0.91) and good test-retest repeatability for alpha angle (ICC=0.87). The MDC95 was 4.6 degrees for MPA and 6.1 degrees for alpha angle. Five percent of patients had a difference outside of the MDC95 for the alpha angle, compared with 2% for the MPA. Conclusion: Measurements of first metatarsal alignment and rotation are reliable between assessors and repeatable between sequential WBCTs in patients without forefoot pathology. Subtle differences in patient positioning during image acquisition do not significantly affect measurements, supporting the validity of this method of assessment in longitudinal patient care. Level of Evidence: Level IV, retrospective case series.