» Articles » PMID: 19308536

Lower-limb Growth: How Predictable Are Predictions?

Overview
Journal J Child Orthop
Publisher Sage Publications
Specialty Pediatrics
Date 2009 Mar 25
PMID 19308536
Citations 33
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this review is to clarify the different methods of predictions for growth of the lower limb and to propose a simplified method to calculate the final limb deficit and the correct timing of epiphysiodesis.

Background: Lower-limb growth is characterized by four different periods: antenatal growth (exponential); birth to 5 years (rapid growth); 5 years to puberty (stable growth); and puberty, which is the final growth spurt characterized by a rapid acceleration phase lasting 1 year followed by a more gradual deceleration phase lasting 1.5 years. The younger the child, the less precise is the prediction. Repeating measurements can increase the accuracy of predictions and those calculated at the beginning of puberty are the most accurate. The challenge is to reduce the margin of uncertainty. Confrontation of the different parameters-bone age, Tanner signs, annual growth velocity of the standing height, sub-ischial length and sitting height-is the most accurate method. Charts and diagrams are only models and templates. There are many mathematical equations in the literature; we must be able to step back from these rigid calculations because they are a false guarantee. The dynamic of growth needs a flexible approach. There are, however, some rules of thumb that may be helpful for different clinical scenarios.

Calculation Of Limb Length Discrepancy: For congenital malformations, at birth the limb length discrepancy must be multiplied by 5 to give the final limb length discrepancy. Multiple by 3 at 1 year of age; by 2 at 3 years in girls and 4 years in boys; by 1.5 at 7 years in girls and boys, by 1.2 at 9 years in girls and 11 years in boys and by 1.1 at the onset of puberty (11 years bone age for girls and 13 years bone age for boys).

Timing Of Epiphysiodesis: For the timing of epiphysiodesis, several simple principles must be observed to reduce the margin of error; strict and repeated measurements, rigorous analysis of the data obtained, perfect evaluation of bone age with elbow plus hand radiographs and confirmation with Tanner signs. The decision should always be taken at the beginning of puberty. A simple rule is that, at the beginning of puberty, there is an average of 5 cm growth remaining at the knee. There are four common different scenarios: (1) A 5-cm discrepancy-epiphysiodesis of both femur and tibia at the beginning of puberty (11 years bone age girls and 13 years in boys). (2) A 4-cm discrepancy-epiphysiodesis of femur and tibia 6 months after the onset of puberty (11 years 6 months bone age girls, 13 years 6 months bone age boys, tri-radiate cartilage open). (3) A 3-cm discrepancy-epiphysiodesis of femur only at the start of puberty, (skeletal age of 11 years in girls and 13 years in boys). (4) A 2-cm discrepancy-epiphysiodesis of femur only, 1 year after the start of puberty (12 years bone age girls and 14 years in boys).

Citing Articles

Enhancing Pediatric Bone Age Assessment Using Artificial Intelligence: Implications for Orthopedic Surgery.

Zadoo N, Tak N, Reddy A, Patel R Cureus. 2025; 17(2):e79507.

PMID: 39989489 PMC: 11847569. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.79507.


Accuracy of adult height predictions in patients with axial leg deviations using the Modified and the Abbreviated Modified Fels Knee System.

Braun S, Thewes N, Holder J, Rickert M, Stief F, Brenneis M PLoS One. 2024; 19(11):e0311985.

PMID: 39531438 PMC: 11556750. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0311985.


Prevalence and Predictors of Concomitant Meniscal Surgery During Pediatric and Adolescent ACL Reconstruction: Analysis of 4729 Patients Over 20 Years at a Tertiary-Care Regional Children's Hospital.

Pruneski J, Tavabi N, Heyworth B, Kocher M, Kramer D, Christino M Orthop J Sports Med. 2024; 12(3):23259671241236496.

PMID: 38515604 PMC: 10956158. DOI: 10.1177/23259671241236496.


Bone Age Assessment Using Artificial Intelligence in Korean Pediatric Population: A Comparison of Deep-Learning Models Trained With Healthy Chronological and Greulich-Pyle Ages as Labels.

Kim P, Yoon H, Kim J, Hwang J, Choi J, Hwang J Korean J Radiol. 2023; 24(11):1151-1163.

PMID: 37899524 PMC: 10613838. DOI: 10.3348/kjr.2023.0092.


Imaging the pediatric anterior cruciate ligament: not little adults.

Poutre A, Meyers A Pediatr Radiol. 2023; 53(8):1587-1599.

PMID: 36856757 DOI: 10.1007/s00247-023-05608-7.


References
1.
Lefort J . [Utilization of a coefficient of residual growth in prediction of lower limb discrepancies (author's transl)]. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1981; 67(8):753-6. View

2.
Shapiro F . Developmental patterns in lower-extremity length discrepancies. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982; 64(5):639-51. View

3.
Dewaele J, Fabry G . The timing of epiphysiodesis. A comparative study between the use of the method of Anderson and Green and the Moseley chart. Acta Orthop Belg. 1992; 58(1):43-7. View

4.
Kasser J, Jenkins R . Accuracy of leg length prediction in children younger than 10 years of age. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997; (338):9-13. DOI: 10.1097/00003086-199705000-00003. View

5.
Porat S, Peyser A, ROBIN G . Equalization of lower limbs by epiphysiodesis: results of treatment. J Pediatr Orthop. 1991; 11(4):442-8. DOI: 10.1097/01241398-199107000-00004. View