Effectiveness of Ponseti technique in management of arthrogrypotic clubfeet - a prospective study.
Arthrogryposis multiplex congenita (AMC)
Dimeglio score
Pirani score
Ponseti technique
clubfeet
relapse
tenotomy
Journal
International journal of burns and trauma
ISSN: 2160-2026
Titre abrégé: Int J Burns Trauma
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101581623
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
31
07
2022
accepted:
10
03
2023
medline:
22
5
2023
pubmed:
22
5
2023
entrez:
22
5
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Clubfoot constitutes roughly 70 percent of all foot deformities in arthrogryposis syndrome and 98% of those in classic arthrogryposis. Treatment of arthrogrypotic clubfoot is difficult and challenging due to a combination of factors like stiffness of ankle-foot complex, severe deformities and resistance to conventional treatment, frequent relapses and the challenge is further compounded by presence of associated hip and knee contractures. A prospective clinical study was conducted using a sample of nineteen clubfeet in twelve arthrogrypotic children. During weekly visits Pirani and Dimeglio scores were assigned to each foot followed by manipulation and serial cast application according to the classical Ponseti technique. Mean initial Pirani score and Dimeglio score were 5.23 ± 0.5 and 15.79 ± 2.4 respectively. Mean Pirani and Dimeglio score at last follow up were 2.37 ± 1.9 and 8.26 ± 4.93 respectively. An average of 11.3 casts was required to achieve correction. Tendoachilles tenotomy was required in all 19 AMC clubfeet. The primary outcome measure was to evaluate the role of Ponseti technique in management of arthrogrypotic clubfeet. The secondary outcome measure was to study the possible causes of relapses and complications with additional procedures required to manage clubfeet in AMC an initial correction was achieved in 13 out of 19 arthrogrypotic clubfeet (68.4%). Relapse occurred in 8 out of 19 clubfeet. Five of those relapsed feet were corrected by re-casting ± tenotomy. 52.6% of arthrogrypotic clubfeet were successfully treated by the Ponseti technique in our study. Three patients failed to respond to Ponseti technique required some form of soft tissue surgery. Based on our results, we recommend the Ponseti technique as the first line initial treatment for arthrogrypotic clubfeet. Although such feet require a higher number of plaster casts with a higher rate of tendo-achilles tenotomy but the eventual outcome is satisfactory. Although, relapses are higher than classical idiopathic clubfeet, most of them respond to re-manipulation and serial casting ± re-tenotomy.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Clubfoot constitutes roughly 70 percent of all foot deformities in arthrogryposis syndrome and 98% of those in classic arthrogryposis. Treatment of arthrogrypotic clubfoot is difficult and challenging due to a combination of factors like stiffness of ankle-foot complex, severe deformities and resistance to conventional treatment, frequent relapses and the challenge is further compounded by presence of associated hip and knee contractures.
METHOD
METHODS
A prospective clinical study was conducted using a sample of nineteen clubfeet in twelve arthrogrypotic children. During weekly visits Pirani and Dimeglio scores were assigned to each foot followed by manipulation and serial cast application according to the classical Ponseti technique. Mean initial Pirani score and Dimeglio score were 5.23 ± 0.5 and 15.79 ± 2.4 respectively. Mean Pirani and Dimeglio score at last follow up were 2.37 ± 1.9 and 8.26 ± 4.93 respectively. An average of 11.3 casts was required to achieve correction. Tendoachilles tenotomy was required in all 19 AMC clubfeet.
RESULT
RESULTS
The primary outcome measure was to evaluate the role of Ponseti technique in management of arthrogrypotic clubfeet. The secondary outcome measure was to study the possible causes of relapses and complications with additional procedures required to manage clubfeet in AMC an initial correction was achieved in 13 out of 19 arthrogrypotic clubfeet (68.4%). Relapse occurred in 8 out of 19 clubfeet. Five of those relapsed feet were corrected by re-casting ± tenotomy. 52.6% of arthrogrypotic clubfeet were successfully treated by the Ponseti technique in our study. Three patients failed to respond to Ponseti technique required some form of soft tissue surgery.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Based on our results, we recommend the Ponseti technique as the first line initial treatment for arthrogrypotic clubfeet. Although such feet require a higher number of plaster casts with a higher rate of tendo-achilles tenotomy but the eventual outcome is satisfactory. Although, relapses are higher than classical idiopathic clubfeet, most of them respond to re-manipulation and serial casting ± re-tenotomy.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
33-43Informations de copyright
IJBT Copyright © 2023.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
None.
Références
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009 Jul;91 Suppl 4:40-6
pubmed: 19571066
J Pediatr Orthop B. 1997 Jul;6(3):159-66
pubmed: 9260643
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1985 Apr;(194):93-8
pubmed: 3978941
J Pediatr Orthop. 1998 Nov-Dec;18(6):760-4
pubmed: 9821132
J Pediatr Orthop. 1994 Nov-Dec;14(6):768-72
pubmed: 7814592
J Pediatr Orthop. 1997 Nov-Dec;17(6):803-7
pubmed: 9591987
J Child Orthop. 2018 Dec 01;12(6):575-581
pubmed: 30607204
Brain Dev. 1998 Oct;20(7):507-11
pubmed: 9840670
J Child Orthop. 2016 Feb;10(1):15-8
pubmed: 26833334
J Child Orthop. 2009 Oct;3(5):383-90
pubmed: 19669823
J Pediatr Orthop. 1984 Nov;4(6):705-10
pubmed: 6511898
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001 Jul;83(5):731-7
pubmed: 11476315
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009 May;467(5):1283-93
pubmed: 19142694
Iowa Orthop J. 2000;20:59-64
pubmed: 10934626
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1984 Nov;66(5):697-9
pubmed: 6389557
Int Orthop. 2021 Jan;45(1):155-163
pubmed: 32651710
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2002 Nov-Dec;10(6):417-24
pubmed: 12470044
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1971 Aug;53(3):468-73
pubmed: 4934997
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008 Jul;90(7):1501-7
pubmed: 18594099
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1970 Aug;52(3):483-93
pubmed: 5455080
J Pediatr Orthop. 2009 Jun;29(4):393-7
pubmed: 19461383
Iowa Orthop J. 2008;28:22-6
pubmed: 19223944
J Pediatr Orthop B. 1995;4(2):129-36
pubmed: 7670979
J Child Orthop. 2009 Feb;3(1):39-46
pubmed: 19308611
JBJS Rev. 2015 Jun 23;3(6):
pubmed: 27490015