Skip to main content
Log in

Effect of non-vascularized fibular harvest on the donor limb: radiological evaluation at a mean follow-up of  twelve point eight years

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The study is aimed at evaluating the long-term (at a minimum follow-up of 10 years) impact of non-vascularized fibular harvest on the donor limbs.

Methods

There were 27 donor limbs (n = 19 children) available for retrospective radiological review. The graft was obtained bilaterally in eight patients. The following parameters were evaluated in the follow-up radiographs: continuity/non-continuity of fibular regenerate, width of the regenerated fibula, distal fibular station, medial proximal tibial angle, posterior proximal tibial angle, lateral distal tibial angle (LDTA), anterior distal tibial angle, and tibia diaphyseal angulation (interphyseal angles). For analysis and comparisons, the donor limbs were compared to the healthy limbs (controls) of the children with unilateral harvest. Additionally, the impact of continuous and non-continuous fibular regeneration was separately analyzed.

Results

The mean child’s age at the time of fibular harvest was four years. The mean follow-up was 12.8 years. The fibula was found regenerated in continuity in 22 limbs of 15 children (81.5%). When analyzed as a combined group (both continuous and non-continuous fibular regenerations), all the donor limb radiological parameters matched those of healthy limbs except LDTA (p = 0.04). In the subgroup analysis between non-continuous and continuous fibulae, significant abnormalities were again obvious in LDTA (p = 0.0001). The non-continuous fibulae were significantly lesser in width. All limbs with non-continuous fibular regeneration manifested ankle valgus.

Conclusions

The non-vascularized fibula emerged as a relatively safe procedure in the long term with minimal affections of the knee, ankle, or tibial anatomy when longitudinal integrity of fibula was restored. The non-regenerations of the fibula may be prone to developing ankle valgus.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Enclosed within manuscript.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. González-Herranz P, del Río A, Burgos J, López-Mondejar JA, Rapariz JM (2003) Valgus deformity after fibular resection in children. J Pediatr Orthop 23:55–59

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Nathan SS, Athanasian E, Boland PJ, Healey JH (2009) Valgus ankle deformity after vascularized fibular reconstruction for oncologic disease. Ann Surg Oncol 16:1938–1945

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kang SH, Rhee SK, Song SW, Chung JW, Kim YC, Suhl KH (2010) Ankle deformity secondary to acquired fibular segmental defect in children. Clin Orthop Surg 2:179–185

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Sulaiman AR, Wan Z, Awang S, Che Ahmad A, Halim AS, Ahmad Mohd Zain R (2015) Long-term effect on foot and ankle donor site following vascularized fibular graft resection in children. J Pediatr Orthop B 24:450–455

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bettin D, Böhm H, Clatworthy M, Zurakowski D, Link TM (2003) Regeneration of the donor side after autogenous fibula transplantation in 53 patients: evaluation by dual x-ray absorptiometry. Acta Orthop Scand 74:332–336

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Xin Z, Kim K, Jung S (2009) Regeneration of the fibula using a periosteum-preserving technique in children. Orthopedics 32:820

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Agarwal A (2019) Fibular donor site following non vascularized harvest: clinico-radiological outcome at minimal five year follow-up. Int Orthop 43:1927–1931

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Agarwal A (2023) Nonvascularized fibular harvest in children: impact on donor limbs. J Pediatr Orthop B 32:197–205

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Soejima O, Ogata K, Ishinishi T, Fukahori Y, Miyauchi R (1994) Anatomic considerations of the peroneal nerve for division of the fibula during high tibial osteotomy. Orthop Rev 23:244–247

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Pacelli LL, Gillard J, McLoughlin SW, Buehler MJ (2003) A biomechanical analysis of donor-site ankle instability following free fibular graft harvest. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85:597–603

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Malhotra D, Puri R, Owen R (1984) Valgus deformity of the ankle in children with spina bifida aperta. J Bone Joint Surg Br 66:381–385

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Paley D (2002) Principles of deformity correction. Springer pp. 1–17

  13. Shah HH, Doddabasappa SN, Joseph B (2009) Congenital posteromedial bowing of the tibia: a retrospective analysis of growth abnormalities in the leg. J Pediatr Orthop B 18:120–128

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Takebe K, Nakagawa A, Minami H, Kanazawa H, Hirohata K (1984) Role of the fibula in weight-bearing. Clin Orthop Relat Res 184:289–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Burchardt H (1983) The biology of bone graft repair. Clin Orthop Relat Res 174:28–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Anil Agarwal: conception, analysis and interpretation of data, drafting the manuscript, and approval of the final version. Ankita KS: analysis and interpretation of data and approval of final version. Kishmita Sachdeva: analysis and interpretation of data and approval of final version. Lokesh Sharma: analysis and interpretation of data, drafting the manuscript, and approval of the final version. Varun Garg: analysis and interpretation of data, drafting the manuscript, and approval of the final version.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anil Agarwal.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

Retrospective chart review.

Consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 21 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Agarwal, A., KS, A., Sachdeva, K. et al. Effect of non-vascularized fibular harvest on the donor limb: radiological evaluation at a mean follow-up of  twelve point eight years. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-024-06150-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-024-06150-3

Keywords

Navigation