Long-term evaluation of the distal transverse plantar approach for Morton’s neuroma excision
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is currently no consensus on the ideal approach for the operative treatment of Morton’s neuroma. The distal transverse plantar approach aims at optimal exposure without the scar complications associated with the longitudinal plantar approach. Long-term evaluation based on validated outcome instruments is lacking. The main purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the long-term clinical outcome of this approach using validated function and scar evaluation scores. METHODS: Forty-nine patients operated on at our institution were examined clinically by two independent observers using the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) and the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS). Patients who underwent neurectomy alone and those who had additional foot surgery were compared. RESULTS: Assessment at a mean of 7.9 years (range 4–12) postoperatively revealed a mean FAAM score of 84.8 ± 25% and a mean VSS score of 1.57 ± 1.7. Patients who underwent neurectomy alone had higher FAAM scores at follow up. We observed no complication that required an additional procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The transverse plantar approach results in good objective outcome scores, including scar healing, in the long term. This is our preferred technique because, in our experience, it offers optimal visualisation of the nerve, does not require deep dissection and allows the exposure of two adjacent web spaces of the foot through a single incision.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".