Peroneus Brevis to Longus Tendon Transfer in the Treatment of the Flexible Progressive Collapsing Foot Deformity: A Cadaveric Study
Authors: Conti Matthew S. , Kim Jaeyoung , Hoffman Jeffrey , Ellis Scott J. , Deland Jonathan , Steineman Brett D. 
Published: December 2023

Category: Midfoot/Forefoot; Hindfoot Introduction/Purpose: Although operative treatment of the flexible progressive collapsing foot deformity (PCFD) remains controversial, correction of residual forefoot varus and stabilization of the medial column are important components of reconstruction. An opening wedge medial cuneiform osteotomy or first tarsometatarsal fusion is traditionally performed to plantarflex the first metatarsal. More recently, tendon transfers such as a peroneus brevis (PB) to peroneus longus (PL) have been proposed. However, there is little data to support their use. The aim of our study was to determine the effect of an isolated PB- to-PL transfer (PBT) on medial column and hindfoot joint kinematics in a simulated PCFD (sPCFD) cadaveric model using a robotic gait simulator. We hypothesized that a PBT in a sPCFD model would partially restore kinematics to the intact state. Methods: A validated six-degree of freedom robot (Baxter et al., 2016) was used to simulate the stance phase of level walking for 6 mid-tibia cadaveric specimens (3 male; age: 72 ± 8 years). An eight-camera motion capture system was used to track reflective markers fixed to bones of the foot and ankle. Three conditions were tested for each specimen: intact, sPCFD (Henry et al., 2022), and after PBT. The PBT was performed by transecting the PB and advancing the proximal stump 1 cm into the PL (Sanhudo, 2019). Outcome measures included kinematics of the talonavicular, subtalar, and first tarsometatarsal joints. Maximum differences between the PBT and sPCFD conditions and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) were calculated. The percent deformity correction was determined by dividing the difference between the PB and sPCFD states by the difference between the intact and sPCFD states at the site of maximum deformity correction. Results: Relative to the sPCFD condition, the PBT resulted in a maximum increase in talonavicular plantarflexion of 1.8° (95%CI 0.9°-2.7°) with 159% correction during midstance, decrease in talonavicular abduction of 1.5° (95%CI 0.3°-2.8°) with 65% correction during midstance, and decrease in talonavicular eversion of 2.4° (95%CI 1.2°-3.8°) with 90% correction during mid-to- late stance. All deformities had consistent correction at the talonavicular joint during stance (Figure 1). Additionally, the PBT resulted in a maximum increase in subtalar plantarflexion by 0.8° (95%CI 0.3°-1.8°) with 155% correction in early stance, decrease in subtalar abduction by 0.8° (95%CI 0.5°-1.2°) with 191% correction during early stance, and decrease in subtalar eversion by 1.5° (95%CI 0.5°-2.2°) with 178% correction during mid-stance. There was no effect on first tarsometatarsal joint kinematics. Conclusion: A PB-to-PL transfer in a sPCFD model resulted in the correction of multiple deformities including increased plantarflexion and decreased abduction at the talonavicular joint compared to the sPCFD without the transfer, most notably during PB activation in stance. The PBT also decreased eversion at the talonavicular and subtalar joints. Our results suggest that the addition of a PBT as part of the surgical management of the flexible PCFD contributes to correction of the residual forefoot varus, midfoot abduction, and hindfoot valgus deformities by plantarflexing through the medial column and removing a deforming force on the foot by the PB.