medigraphic.com
ISSN 2007-087X (Print)
Órgano Oficial de la Sociedad Mexicana de Ortopedia Pediátrica

2019, Number 1-3

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Ortop Ped 2019; 21 (1-3)

Extraarticular reconstruction surgery for ankle stability in the peroneal hemimelia

Arenas-Díaz AL, Velázquez-Aréstegui D

Language: Spanish
References: 21
Page: 6-11
PDF size: 223.01 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Peroneal Hemimelia is the most frequent congenital deficiency of long bones, its incidence ranges between 7 and 20 per million live births. This disease presents a deformity and difference in the length of the tibia with an anteromedial inclination or angulation as well as deformity of the foot in equine and valgus and/or absence of the lateral rays of the foot. The objective of this work was to evaluate the clinical-radiological results at 24 months of evolution in patients with postoperative peroneal hemimelia of extra-articular ankle reconstruction surgery. A retrospective, descriptive, cross-sectional study was conducted in which 18 patients with peroneal hemimelia of both sexes between 3-7 years are included, for their evaluation clinical parameters were used (dorsal flexion, plantar, pronation and supination of the foot and ankle) and radiographic parameters (lateral axis of the tibia, tibioastragaline angle and angle of calcaneal inclination), the PODCI and Guillette scale were also used. The average age was 4.2 years, eight right and 10 left limbs; 17 limbs were type 3A of Paley. The average post-surgical PODCI score was 80 points and Guillette 7.5 points. Pearson’s p (0.50) showed a correlation in the parameter of dorsal flexion, plantar and pronation of the postoperative state. In the radiographic evaluation correlation was observed in all parameters (0.62-0.71). In patients with hemimelia peronea Paley 3A treated under extra-articular reconstruction surgery for ankle stabilization, clinical and radiographic parameters were improved. The improvement of these parameters spins to the next level of correction of angular deformities or elongation.


REFERENCES

  1. Mccarthy JJ, Glancy GL, Chang FM, Eilert RE. Fibular hemimelia: outcome measurements after amputation and lengthening. J Bone Jt Surg. 2000; 82(12): 1732.

  2. Stanitski D. Fibular hemimelia: guidelines for treatment based on a new classification. J Bone Jt Surg. 2003; 85: 162.

  3. Kirienko A, Portinaro N. Correction of the tibia and equino-valgus foot deformity in type II fibular hemimelia with ilizarov method. J Bone Jt Surg. 2003; 85: 268-269.

  4. Napiontek M, Shadi M. One-staged procedure for foot and tibia correction in fibular hemimelia. J Bone Jt Surg. 2003; 85 :278.

  5. El-Sayed MM, Correll J, Pohlig K. Limb sparing reconstructive surgery and Ilizarov lengthening in fibular hemimelia of Achterman-Kalamchi type II patients. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2010; 19(1): 55-60.

  6. Shalaby H, Hefny H, Thakeb M, El-Kawy S, Elmoatasem E. Ankle joint reconstruction in fibular hemimelia in conjunction with the Ilizarov technique. J Bone Jt Surg. 2006; 88: 125.

  7. Paley D, Saghieh S, Song BY, Young M, Herzenberg JE. Lengthening reconstruction surgery for treatment of fibular hemimelia. J Bone Jt Surg. 2005; 87: 317.

  8. Zarzycki D, Jasiewicz B, Kacki W, Koniarski A, Kasprzyk M, Zarzycka M et al. Limb lengthening in fibular hemimelia type II: can it be an alternative to amputation? J Pediatr Orthop B. 2006; 15(2): 147-153.

  9. Oberc A, Sułko J. Fibular hemimelia - diagnostic management, principles, and results of treatment. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2013; 22(5): 450-456.

  10. Caskey PM, Lester EL. Association of fibular hemimelia and clubfoot. J Pediatr Orthop. 2002; 22(4): 522-525.

  11. Schwend RM1, Drennan JC. Cavus foot deformity in children. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2003; 11(3): 201-211.

  12. Catagni MA, Radwan M, Lovisetti L, Guerreschi F, Elmoghazy NA. Limb lengthening and deformity correction by the Ilizarov technique in type III fibular hemimelia: an alternative to amputation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011; 469(4): 1175-11780.

  13. Radler C, Antonietti G, Ganger R, Grill F. Recurrence of axial malalignment after surgical correction in congenital femoral deficiency and fibular hemimelia. Int Orthop. 2011; 35(11): 1683-1688.

  14. Paley D. Progress in and from limb lengthening. Current Progress in Orthopedics. Chapter 5: 2005, pp. 22-27.

  15. Changulani M, Ali F, Mulgrew E, Day JB, Zenios M. Outcome of limb lengthening in fibular hemimelia and a functional foot. J Child Orthop. 2010; 4(6): 519-524.

  16. El-Tayeby HM, Ahmed AA. Ankle reconstruction in type II fibular hemimelia. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr. 2012; 7(1): 23-26.

  17. Herzenberg JE. When is external fixation used in foot surgery? IPOS-Orlando. 2015, 1-3.

  18. Paley D. Surgical reconstruction for fibular hemimelia. J Child Orthop. 2016; 10(6): 557-583.

  19. Montalvo GM, Cassis ZN, Harfush NA, Camacho FL, Rivera RA. Alargamiento óseo en pacientes con hemimelia peronea. Acta Ortop Mex. 2005; 19(3): 99-103.

  20. Stanitski DF, Stanitski CL. Fibular hemimelia: a new classification system. J Pediatr Orthop. 2003; 23(1): 30-34.

  21. Alaseirlis DA, Korompilias AV, Beris AE, Soucacos PN. Residual malformations and leg length discrepancy after treatment of fibular hemimelia. J Orthop Surg Res. 2011; 6: 51.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com