RESUMEN
We present the possible etiopatogenic causes of posterior tibial dysfunction or painful flat foot of the adult and the cause-and-effect relationship that may exist. We also expose the gradation of the lesion and the different therapeutic options for the surgical treatment of the deformity. Since 1939, multiple articles have been published, which have been endorsed by clinical, experimental, electromyographic and biomechanical studies; publications that have been consulted and evaluated for the development of this review. In our opinion: the dysfunction of the posterior tibial is caused in principle by a failure of the plantar navicular calcaneus ligament (spring ligament), the main passive stabilizer of the internal plantar arch. This failure would, in time, mean an increase in work of the posterior tibial tendon, in itself "insufficient", which would go into fatigue, until it reached a partial or total rupture. Published work on soft-part procedures acting on the posterior tibial tendon in stage II has not had the expected result in the natural history of deformity. Arthrodesis, on the other hand, has been effective in other stages, but is associated with a loss of movement dynamics in the back foot and increased pressure on adjacent joints.
Presentamos la posible causa etiopatogénica de la disfunción del tibial posterior o pie plano doloroso del adulto y la relación causa-efecto que puede existir. También exponemos la clasificación de la lesión y las diferentes opciones para el tratamiento quirúrgico de la deformidad. Desde 1939, múltiples artículos han sido publicados, avalados por la clínica, así como por estudios experimentales, electromiográficos y biomecánicos; publicaciones consultadas y evaluadas para el desarrollo de esta revisión, según nuestro criterio: el primum movens de la disfunción del tibial posterior es ocasionado por un fallo del ligamento en hamaca o calcáneo navicular plantar (spring ligament), principal estabilizador pasivo del arco plantar interno. Este fallo supondría en el tiempo un aumento de trabajo del tendón tibial posterior, de por sí "insuficiente", que entraría en fatiga hasta llegar a la rotura parcial o total. Los trabajos publicados en relación con los procedimientos de partes blandas que actúan sobre el tendón tibial posterior en el estadio II no han tenido el resultado esperado en la historia natural de la deformidad. La artrodesis por el contrario, ha sido efectiva en otros estadios, pero está asociada a una pérdida de la dinámica del movimiento en el retropié y a un aumento de la presión en las articulaciones adyacentes.
Asunto(s)
Calcáneo , Pie Plano , Pie Plano/diagnóstico por imagen , Pie Plano/etiología , Pie Plano/cirugía , Pie/cirugía , Humanos , Transferencia Tendinosa , TendonesRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Tibialis posterior tendon transfer is performed when loss of dorsiflexion has to be compensated. We evaluated the circumtibial (CT), above-retinaculum transmembranous (TMAR), and under-retinaculum transmembranous (TMUR) transfer gliding resistance and foot kinematics in a cadaveric foot model during ankle range of motion (ROM). METHODS: Eight cadaveric foot-ankle distal tibia specimens were dissected free of soft tissues on the proximal end, applying an equivalent force to 50% of the stance phase to every tendon, except for the Achilles tendon. Dorsiflexion was tested with all of the tibialis posterior tendon transfer methods (CT, TMAR, and TMUR) using a tension tensile machine. A 10-repetition cycle of dorsiflexion and plantarflexion was performed for each transfer. Foot motion and the force needed to achieve dorsiflexion were recorded. RESULTS: The CT transfer showed the highest gliding resistance ( P < .01). Regarding kinematics, all transfers decreased ankle ROM, with the CT transfer being the condition with less dorsiflexion compared with the control group (6.8 vs 15 degrees, P < .05). TMUR transfer did perform better than TMAR with regard to ankle dorsiflexion, but no difference was shown in gliding resistance. The CT produced a supination moment on the forefoot. CONCLUSION: The CT transfer had the highest tendon gliding resistance, achieved less dorsiflexion and had a supination moment. Clinical Relevance We suggest that the transmembranous tibialis posterior tendon transfer should be the transfer of choice. The potential bowstringing effect when performing a tibialis posterior tendon transfer subcutaneously (TMAR) could be avoided if the transfer is routed under the retinaculum, without significant compromise of the final function and even with a possible better ankle range of motion.