Title: A Hospital Based Study of Ponseti Method versus Accelerated Ponseti Method as Conservative Treatment for Congenital Talipes Eqinovarus

Authors: Suraj Kumar Jain, Abhishek Sahu

 DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v7i3.163

Abstract

Objective: To compare between Ponseti method and accelerated Ponseti method as conservative treatment of ctev by assessing Pirani scoring system in terms of recovery, time taken, number of serial castings and requirement of tenotomy.

Method: Prospective Randomized controlled trial where 80 patients randomly selected into 2 groups 40 each, Group A treated by Ponseti method and Group B treated by accelerated Ponseti method. Group A underwent weekly manipulation and cast and Group B underwent twice weekly manipulation and cast. Pirani score was documented at every visit at presentation, before serial casting after removal of previous cast till Pirani score less than 1. Then after followed by tenotomy and final cast.

Results: 40 % cases were bilateral.63% male child were affected. All deformities were corrected in 92 % in Group A and 90% in Group B. Average no. of casts required were 5.5 in Group A and 5.8 in Group B. The difference was found to statistically not significant.

Conclusion: Accelerated ponseti method is as good conservative method for ctev with added advantages of shorter duration of casting and speedy recovery.

Keywords: Accelerated Ponseti, clubfoot, standard Ponseti.

References

  1. Mkandawire NC, Kaunda E. Incidence and patterns of congenital talipes equinovarus (clubfoot) deformity at Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital, Banter, Malawi. East Afr J Surg2004;9:28-31.
  2. Siapkara A, Duncan R. Congenital talipes equinovarus: a review of current management. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2007;89-B:995-1000.
  3. Chung CS, Nemechek RW, Larsen IJ, Ching GH. Genetic and epidemiological studies of clubfoot in Hawaii: general and medical considerations. Hum Hered1969;19:321-42.
  4. Pirani S. Pirani severity scoring. In: Staheli I, ed. Clubfoot: Ponseti management. Third ed. Global-HELP, 2009:27. http://www.global-help.org/ Publications/books/ (date last accessed 22 November 2010).
  5. Flynn JM, Donohue M, Mackenzie WG. An independent assessment of two clubfoot-classification systems. J PediatrOrthop1998;18:323-7.
  6. Cooper DM, Dietz FR. Treatment of idiopathic clubfoot: a thirty-year follow-up note. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 1995;77-A:1477-89.
  7. 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;113:376-80.
  8. Harnett P, Freeman R, Harrison WJ, Brown LC, Beckles V. An accelerated Ponseti versus the standard Ponseti method: A prospective randomised controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011;93:404-8.

Corresponding Author

Abhishek Sahu

V.I.M.S.A.R., Burla