Journals / Van Tıp Dergisi / 2013 / Cilt: 20 - Sayı: 4

Treatment results of pes equinovarus with ponseti method

Doğuştan çarpık ayaklı hastalardayöntemi ile tedavi sonuçlarımız ponseti

Pages
212–216
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The rate of correction by Ponseti method at complex TEV patients was 100%, but nevertheless recurrence was viewed during long- lasting follow-up period for all patients.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: In current study, we assessed 52 foot of 32 congenital talipes equinovarus (TEV) patients whom we treated with Ponseti method at Orthopaedics and Traumatology department of Yüzüncü Yil University Medical Faculty between 2005-2008.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Method: Eight casts have been used for patient’s foot on avarage (between 6-10).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The rate of correction by Ponseti method at complex TEV patients was 100%, but nevertheless recurrence was viewed during long- lasting follow-up period for all patients.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2005-2008 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: In current study, we assessed 52 foot of 32 congenital talipes equinovarus (TEV) patients whom we treated with Ponseti method at Orthopaedics and Traumatology department of Yüzüncü Yil University Medical Faculty between 2005-2008. Before treatment and at the last examination, evaluation has been executed with classification of Dimeglio. Material and Method: Eight casts have been used for patient’s foot on avarage (between 6-10). On 42 foot, achilles tenotomy with mini open technique has been applied under operation conditions with local anaesthesia. After removing the cast, Steenback orthosis was used for each foot. The average follow- up time was 36 months (between 6-59 months). Results: The most observed complication diagnosed at congenital TEV patients was metatarsus adductus (44%). There was metatarsus adductus in 3 of 17 patients who had compliance with orthesis (17%) and 9 of 10 patients who had non-compliance with orthesis (90%). Although all patients had complex TEV, the compliance to orthesis was perfect, recurrence was viewed in all of them, so we needed more treating procedures for these patients. Conclusion: In our study, we achieved 78% success rate with cast treatment and manipulation applied by Ponseti technique in the treatment of congenital TEV patients. Compliance of orthesis possibly affects on the result of the treatment. The rate of correction by Ponseti method at complex TEV patients was 100%, but nevertheless recurrence was viewed during long- lasting follow-up period for all patients.

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmada 2005 ve 2008 yılları arasında Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Ortopedi ve Travmatoloji Anabilim Dalında Ponseti yöntemi ile tedavi ettiğimiz doğuştan çarpık ayaklı 32 hastanın 56 ayağı değerlendirildi. Hastalarımızın tedaviye başlamadan önce ve son muayenelerinde Dimeglio’nun kullandığı dereceleme sistemi kullanılarak değerlendirme yapıldı. Gereç ve Yöntem: Hastaların ayaklarına ortalama 8 (6–10) alçı yapıldı. 42 ayakta, ameliyathane şartlarında lokal anestezi altında mini açık teknik ile aşilotomi uygulandı. Alçılama sonrası ayaklara 3-4 yıl süreyle Stenback ortezi uygulandı. Ortalama takip süresi 36 ay (16-59 ay) idi. Bulgular: Doğuştan çarpık ayaklı hastalarımızda tespit edilen en sık komplikasyon ön ayak adduksiyonu idi (%44). Orteze uyum gösteren 17 hastanın 3’ünde (%17), uyum göstermeyen 10 hastanın 9’unda (%90) ayak önü adduksiyonu vardı. İdiopatik DÇA’lı hastalarda Plantigrade yürüyebilen hasta oranı %96 idi. Kompleks doğuştan çarpık ayaklı hastaların hepsinde ortez uyumunun tam olmasına rağmen nüks olduğu gözlendi ve bu hastalarda ek cerrahi girişimlere ihtiyaç duyuldu. Sonuç: Çalışmamızda doğuştan çarpık ayaklı hastaların tedavisinde Ponseti yöntemi ile yapılan manipülasyon ve alçı tedavisinde %78 oranında başarı elde edildi. Bu hastalarda ortez uyumunun tedavi sonucunu etkilediği gözlendi. Doğuştan çarpık ayaklı hastalarımızda Ponseti yöntemi ile düzelme oranımız %100 olarak gerçekleşti, Ancak uzun dönem takiplerinde tüm hastalarda nüks görüldü.

🔖

Cite This Article

SÖKMEN, A. C., GÜNER, S., CEYLAN, M. F., GÖKALP, M. A., ÜNSAL, S. Ş., GÖZEN, A., DOĞAN, A. (2013). Treatment results of pes equinovarus with ponseti method. Van Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 20 - Sayı: 4, 212–216. https://ajindex.com/articles/334129

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Ege R. Ayak ve Ayak Bileği Sorunları, Ankara 1997, sy: 177-206 2.Tachdjian’s Pediatric Orthopaedics Third Edition Vol. II sy: 922-959 3.Muratlı HH, Yağmurlu MF, Tabak AY, Biçimoğlu A, Çelebi L. Pesekinovarusda Komplet Suptalar Gevşetme Uyguladığımız Olguların Klinik ve Radyolojik Sonuçları.Artroplasti Artroskopik Cerrahi Dergisi 2001
  2. 12(1):22-31. 4.Bor N, Herzenberg JE, Frick SL. Ponseti management of clubfoot in older infants. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006
  3. :224-248. 5.Heilig MR, Matern RV, Rosenzweig SD, Bennett JT. Current management of idiopathic clubfoot questionnaire: a multicentric study. J Pediatr Orthop 2003
  4. 23(6):780-787. 6.Tümer Y, Uçar DH. Pes Ekino Varusun Yumuşak Dokulara Yapılan Cerrahi Tedavisi TOTBİD Dergisi 2002
  5. 1(2):71-76. 7.Centel T, Bagatur AE, Oğüt T, Aksu T. Comparison of the soft-tissue release methods in idiopathic clubfoot. J Pediatr Orthop 2000
  6. 20(5):648-651. 8.Laaveg SJ, Ponseti IV. Long-term results of treatment of congenital club foot. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1980
  7. 62(1):23-31. 9.Main BJ, Crider RJ, Polk M, Lloyd-Roberts GC, Swann M, Kamdar BA. The results of early operation in talipes equino-varus. A preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1977
  8. 59(3):337-341. 10.Ippolito E, Farsetti P, Caterini R, Tudisco C. Long-term comparative results in patients with congenital clubfoot treated with two different protocols. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003
  9. 85(7):1286-1294. 11.Ponseti IV, Smoley EN. The classic: congenital club foot: the results of treatment. 1963. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009
  10. 467(5):1133-1145. 12.Herzenberg JE, Radler C, Bor N. Ponseti versus traditional methods of casting for idiopathic clubfoot. J Pediatr Orthop 2002
  11. 22(4):517-521. 13.Morcuende JA, Dolan LA, Dietz FR, Ponseti IV. Radical reduction in the rate of extensive corrective surgery for clubfoot using the Ponseti method. Pediatrics 2004
  12. 113(2):376- 380. 14.Tindall AJ, Steinlechner CW, Lavy CB, Mannion S, Mkandawire N. Results of manipulation of idiopathic clubfoot deformity in Malawi by orthopaedic clinical officers using the Ponseti method: a realistic alternative for the developing world? J Pediatr Orthop 2005
  13. 25(5):627-629. 15.Colburn M, Williams M. Evaluation of the treatment of idiopathic clubfoot by using the Ponseti method. J Foot Ankle Surg 2003
  14. 42(5):259-267. 16.Cooper DM, Dietz FR. Treatment of idiopathic clubfoot. A thirty-year follow-up note. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1995
  15. 77(10):1477-1489. 17.Pirani S, Zeznik L, Hodges D. Magnetic resonance imaging