» Articles » PMID: 38713286

Fibular Hemimelia: Reconstruction of Difficult Cases with Tibial Lengthening and Ankle Arthrodesis

Overview
Journal Int Orthop
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2024 May 7
PMID 38713286
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: Management of fibular hemimelia includes either prosthetic care with or without a suitable amputation or tibial lengthening. Many studies have documented the success of both procedures. Most parents of these children refuse an amputation or have no access to good prosthetic care. The author presents a limb-salvage procedure with tibial lengthening and ankle stabilization.

Methods: Twelve children of fibular hemimelia with 14 extremities had been subjected to limb lengthening after lateral leg release. To correct the valgus procurvatum, double oblique diaphyseal osteotomy (DODO) of the tibia was performed in 11 extremities. The age of the patients ranged from two to 15 years with the median of five years. All were male. The proposed procedure included three stages of loosening, lengthening, and stabilization with ankle arthrodesis at a later stage.

Results: All patients returned for follow-up for the first four years and had been walking on their sensate feet. With DODO followed by fixator/traction could straighten and lengthen the tibia simultaneously and correct the valgus procurvatum. Ankle stabilization provided stability and a plantigrade foot. A follow-up of six to 30 years with a median of ten years has been reported.

Conclusion: A new procedure of loosening, lengthening, and stabilization of the leg with ankle arthrodesis has been proposed. A follow-up of 30 years with a median of ten years of the said procedure has been reported. The procedure provides a long-lasting plantigrade and painless foot that has sensation and proprioception. An amputation at any level has not been recommended.

References
1.
DURAISWAMI P . Experimental causation of congenital skeletal defects and its significance in orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1952; 34-B(4):646-98. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.34B4.646. View

2.
COVENTRY M, JOHNSON Jr E . Congenital absence of the fibula. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1952; 34 A(4):941-55. View

3.
Achterman C, Kalamchi A . Congenital deficiency of the fibula. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1979; 61-B(2):133-7. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.61B2.438260. View

4.
Birch J, Lincoln T, Mack P, Birch C . Congenital fibular deficiency: a review of thirty years' experience at one institution and a proposed classification system based on clinical deformity. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011; 93(12):1144-51. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.J.00683. View

5.
Stanitski D, Stanitski C . Fibular hemimelia: a new classification system. J Pediatr Orthop. 2002; 23(1):30-4. View