Article

The principles of the Ponseti method in the treatment of congenital clubfoot.

Oddział Ortopedyczno-Urazowy, Uniwersytecki Szpital Dzieciecy, Kraków, Poland.
Ortopedia, traumatologia, rehabilitacja 01/2007; 9(4):436-40.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We present Ignatio Ponseti's approach to idiopathic clubfoot management and its biological basis. The key principles of the Ponseti method of treatment are 1. All deformity components are corrected simultaneously except equinus, which is corrected last, usually by percutaneous Achilles tenotomy. 2. The correction is maintained by external foot rotation around the head of the talus. 3. The excavatus is corrected by supination of the first ray of the foot. 4. The corrections are performed weekly and after 4-5 weeks of treatment a percutaneous Achilles tenotomy is performed in local or general anaesthesia. 5. After another 3 weeks of plaster cast immobilisation, a Dennis Brown brace is used to keep the correction until 4-5 years of life.

0 Followers
 · 
146 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introducción La hemimelia peronea, inicialmente descrita por Gollier 1 en 1698, es la deficiencia congénita más común de los huesos largos. Se presenta en aproximadamente 7 por cada millón de recién nacidos. Su etiología sigue siendo desconocida, aunque se cree que el factor etioló-gico actuaría antes de la sexta o séptima semana de vida intrauterina, previamente al desarrollo embriológico de los huesos largos 2 . Clínicamente, la hemimelia peronea se puede presen-tar con un extenso rango de severidad, desde una leve hipoplasia del peroné con mínimo trastorno funcional hasta una ausencia completa y deficiencia asociada de los radios laterales del pie y los huesos del tarso. Tam-bién se asocia frecuentemente con fémur corto, deficien-cia del ligamento cruzado anterior y deformidades de la cadera, rodilla y pie 1,3,4 . Su forma de presentación clínica más frecuente incluye una discrepancia de longitud de las extremida-des, incurvación anteromedial de la tibia, deformidad en valgo de la rodilla, deformidad en equino-valgo del pie, e inestabilidad del tobillo con ausencia de los radios late-rales del pie 5 . Las dos clasificaciones más utilizadas que proporcio-nan una guía para un abordaje racional en el tratamiento de esta patología son las propuestas por Coventry y John-son1 en 1952 (tabla 1) y por Achterman y Kalamchi 6 en 1979 (tabla 2). Stanitski 7 propone un nuevo sistema de clasificación para la hemimelia peronea basado en su experiencia con 32 pacientes (33 miembros), debido a las relaciones amplias e impredecibles entre el peroné, el Resumen. La hemimelia peronea es una deficiencia congénita del peroné asociada con otras anomalías de la extremidad inferior de difícil tratamiento. Puede existir un acortamiento de la extremidad afectada, y deformidades y posiciones anormales del pie. Generalmente se asocia a pie equino-valgo, pero también existen casos de pie equino-varo-adductus, como en el caso del niño presentado en este artículo. Para corregir esta deformidad se utilizó el méto-do de Ponseti, consiguiéndose un pie plantígrado. Aunque los resultados no son tan buenos como en los casos idio-páticos, el método de Ponseti proporciona muchas ventajas, puesto que se consigue al menos una corrección parcial, que permitirá una cirugía posterior más limitada.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Conservative clubfoot treatment requires weekly cast changes. We questioned whether a method using synthetic fiberglass instead of the traditional plaster material and with the infant lying comfortably on a special foam-casting platform could be satisfactorily used. A retrospective cohort review on idiopathic clubfoot treated with this particular method was carried out. The severity of clubfoot at presentation was assessed with the classification of Dimeglio et al. The outcome of treatment was assessed with the same scoring system at the latest follow-up. The need of secondary open surgical releases was noted. The parent's acceptability of this method was evaluated with a self-designed questionnaire. The existence of a learning curve was explored by comparing the outcomes of 22 feet during two time periods: those treated before 31 December 2003 (group 1) and those treated after 1 January 2004 (group 2). The mean Dimeglio Scores improved from 17.5 to 4.1 for group 1 and from 15.0 to 3.2 for group 2. Nine of 10 feet in group 2 had tenotomy of the tendo Achilles and none needed open surgical release whereas 10 out of 12 feet in group 1 required open releases. A learning curve did exist for this method. No major complication was noted with the technique. Parent acceptability was high for this method, which was effective in the management of severe idiopathic clubfoot.
    Journal of pediatric orthopaedics. Part B / European Paediatric Orthopaedic Society, Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America 11/2009; 19(2):164-70. DOI:10.1097/BPB.0b013e328333ab2e · 0.66 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the efficacy of a modified Copenhagen physical therapy method in reducing surgery rates for congenital idiopathic clubfoot. This research is a retrospective descriptive study of 82 patients (123 clubfeet). All patients were younger than 2 months at the beginning of the treatment and were initially evaluated to classify clubfoot severity using the Harrold and Walker scale. The study period included the years from 1980 to 2003, with an average monitoring of 14.5 years (range, 3-26 years). After 3 years of treatment, 55% of the involved feet did not need surgery, 2% needed percutaneous tenotomy of the Achilles tendon, and 43% had posterior release. At the end of monitoring, 34% feet did not need surgery, 2% had percutaneous tenotomy of the Achilles tendon, and 64% required posterior releases. The Copenhagen method may reduce the necessity of surgical intervention for idiopathic clubfoot.
    Pediatric physical therapy: the official publication of the Section on Pediatrics of the American Physical Therapy Association 03/2012; 24(1):51-6. DOI:10.1097/PEP.0b013e31823dcd25 · 1.29 Impact Factor