BACKGROUND Resection arthroplasty has long been a major treatment option for forefoot deformity caused by rheumatoid arthritis (RA). However, metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint-preserving surgery is now surpassing classic resection arthroplasty. This study was performed to compare the postoperative results of these 2 operative methods. METHODS Fifty-one toes of 40 patients with RA who underwent resection arthroplasty (resection group) or MTP joint-preserving arthroplasty (preservation group) from 2014 to 2017 for forefoot deformity were followed up for >1 year and were retrospectively analyzed. In the preservation group, open reduction of joint dislocation was performed if needed, and the deformity was corrected by metatarsal shortening osteotomy. The mean follow-up period was 21 months. The Japanese Society for Surgery of the Foot (JSSF) scales (objective outcome measures), the Self-Administered Foot Evaluation Questionnaire (SAFE-Q) (subjective outcome measure), and radiographic indices were compared between the groups. The resection group and preservation group comprised 15 toes of 11 patients and 36 toes of 29 patients, respectively. RESULTS There were no significant differences in the preoperative radiographic indices, JSSF scales, or SAFE-Q results between the 2 groups. The preservation group showed better JSSF scores at the last follow-up (median hallux scale, 89 vs 74; median lesser scale, 87 vs 79). In the preservation group, the SAFE-Q scores gradually improved with time until 12 months postoperatively. In the resection group, the scores decreased 3 months postoperatively and then improved and reached a plateau 6 months postoperatively. At 12 months postoperatively, there was no significant difference in the SAFE-Q scores between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS MTP joint-preserving arthroplasty resulted in superior objective scores to resection arthroplasty in patients with RA forefoot deformity. Although the subjective scores did not differ between the groups at the last follow-up, the time course of postoperative quality of life improvement was different between the 2 surgeries. METHODS Level III, retrospective comparative study.