ReviewInternational orthopaedics2026
Evolution of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques in forefoot deformity corrections.
Review in International orthopaedics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo review the historical evolution and technical progression of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) in forefoot deformity corrections, tracing its development from early medical concepts and general surgery milestones to modern, highly specialized foot and ankle interventions.
methodsAn extensive electronic search of the medical and historical literature was performed and complemented by manual review of scientific sources. Historical reports describing the origins of minimally invasive techniques, the evolution of surgical instrumentation, and advancing treatment strategies for forefoot deformities were critically analysed within their scientific and chronological contexts.
resultsThe history of forefoot MIS represents a continuous process of conceptual evolution. The procedure's trajectory mirrors the disruptive history of laparoscopic surgery, transitioning from early enthusiasm and high complication rates in the United States to a European-led renaissance grounded in strict anatomical landmarks and technological advancements, such as the Shannon burr and image intensifiers. For hallux valgus, the procedure has progressed through four distinct generations distinguished by specific osteotomy and fixation strategies, moving toward true three-dimensional deformity correction. In the treatment of hallux rigidus, MIS provides effective joint-preserving options through percutaneous cheilectomies and decompressive osteotomies, as well as joint-sacrificing arthrodesis. For lesser toe deformities, treatment paradigms have shifted toward more standardised classification, and utilizing hardware-free metatarsal and phalangeal osteotomies that rely on strict postoperative weight-bearing to achieve optimal anatomical alignment.
conclusionsThe historical maturation of forefoot MIS illustrates a continuous refinement of surgical "processes" and hardware "ingredients" aimed at optimizing clinical outcomes. Understanding this evolutionary framework provides a crucial foundation for future innovations, including the integration of bioabsorbable implants, 3D-printed instrumentation, and artificial intelligence in foot and ankle surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42867517What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.