Display options
Share it on

JB JS Open Access. 2019 Mar 20;4(1):e0029. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.OA.18.00029. eCollection 2019 Mar 27.

Type-I Tibial Hemimelia: A Limb-Salvage and Lengthening Technique.

JB & JS open access

Surender Singh Yadav

Affiliations

  1. Mirpur Institute of Medical Sciences (MIMS), Mirpur, India.

PMID: 31161149 PMCID: PMC6510468 DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.OA.18.00029

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Tibial hemimelia is a rare but disabling condition. Although reconstructive methods have been described, the recommended treatment typically has been amputation at various levels followed by the use of a suitable prosthesis. A new technique known as

METHODS: Twelve children (18 extremities) with type-I tibial hemimelia were managed surgically. The ages of the patients at the time of surgery ranged from 2 to 14 years. The procedure includes 3 stages: loosening, lengthening, and stabilization. In all patients, the loosening stage involved release of soft-tissue contractures at both ends of the fibula. The lengthening stage involved either supervised lengthening at home with use with use of an external fixator (6 patients) or the use of traction in the hospital (6 patients). In all patients, the stabilization stage was subsequently performed by stabilizing the fibula to the femoral condyles proximally and the talus distally with use of crossed Kirschner wires.

RESULTS: All 12 patients returned for follow-up for the first 5 years. All patients were evaluated by author. Two patients who had ipsilateral femoral focal deficiency were subsequently lost to follow-up. The remaining 10 patients were followed for a mean of 10 years (range, 5 to 32 years). All 10 patients were able to walk on their feet during follow-up. None of the patients in the present study had an amputation or needed a prosthesis. There were no major complications.

CONCLUSIONS: A new procedure, femoro-fibulo-calcaneal arthrodesis, has been proposed for the treatment of type-I tibial hemimelia. The suggested procedure is simple, biological, cost-effective, and dependable. It provides a long-term stable and functional extremity that enables the patient to walk with plantigrade feet with sensation and proprioception. This limb-saving procedure should be considered as an alternative for patients who refuse to lose the limb or for whom good prosthetic care is unavailable.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

References

  1. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1976 Dec;58(8):1138-41 - PubMed
  2. Orthopedics. 2001 Apr;24(4):389-90 - PubMed
  3. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2002 Jan;11(1):53-9 - PubMed
  4. Int Orthop. 2003;27(6):338-42 - PubMed
  5. Acta Orthop Scand. 1964;34:337-48 - PubMed
  6. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1965 Jun;47:695-704 - PubMed
  7. J Child Orthop. 2008 Jun;2(3):169-75 - PubMed
  8. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2009 Sep;18(5):220-4 - PubMed
  9. Arch Dis Child. 1926;1(4):194-229 - PubMed
  10. Niger J Clin Pract. 2011 Oct-Dec;14(4):492-4 - PubMed
  11. Indian J Hum Genet. 2013 Jan;19(1):108-10 - PubMed
  12. Sao Paulo Med J. 2013;131(4):275-8 - PubMed
  13. J Child Orthop. 2016 Dec;10(6):529-555 - PubMed
  14. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989 Feb;71(2):273-7 - PubMed
  15. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989 Feb;71(2):278-87 - PubMed
  16. J Pediatr Orthop. 1987 Jan-Feb;7(1):8-13 - PubMed
  17. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1985 Aug;67(4):581-4 - PubMed
  18. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979 Mar-Apr;(139):97-101 - PubMed
  19. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1971 Aug;53(3):495-9 - PubMed
  20. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1978 Feb;60(1):31-9 - PubMed
  21. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1984 Mar;66(3):453-8 - PubMed
  22. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1983 Mar;65(2):157-9 - PubMed
  23. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993 Nov;75(6):962-6 - PubMed
  24. J Pediatr Orthop. 1996 Jan-Feb;16(1):85-9 - PubMed
  25. J Pediatr Orthop B. 1998 Oct;7(4):298-302 - PubMed

Publication Types