International Orthopaedics

, Volume 35, Issue 5, pp 755–759

Possible mistakes in prediction of bone maturation in fibular hemimelia by Moseley chart

  • György Szőke
  • William G. Mackenzie
  • Gyula Domos
  • Sándor Berki
  • Sándor Kiss
  • J. Richard Bowen
Original Paper
  • 115 Downloads

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to establish a nomogram in order to predict limb length discrepancies in children with unilateral fibular hemimelia more accurately. In 31 children with unilateral fibular hemimelia the femoral-tibial length and skeletal age were determined an average of seven times per case by sequential radiographs during growth. From the data, a skeletal age nomogram was developed which shows a steeply declining mean skeletal age pattern in unilateral fibular hemimelia (the slope in girls was −0.59 and in boys −0.64). This nomogram crosses the normal mean skeletal age line of the Moseley straight-line graph at 10.5 years in girls and at 12 years in boys, and continues to decline until maturity. The results demonstrate an abnormal skeletal maturation process in patients with unilateral fibular hemimelia. The consistently declining steep skeletal age nomogram in unilateral fibular hemimelia makes prediction of skeletal maturity and limb length discrepancy inaccurate by the standard predictive methods particularly when using early skeletal ages. The skeletal age nomogram from our data determines skeletal maturation in children with unilateral fibular hemimelia more accurately, and allows a correct prediction of limb length discrepancy.

References

  1. 1.
    Blair VP, Walker SJ, Sheridan JJ, Schoenecker PL (1982) Epiphyseodesis: a problem of timing. J Pediatr Orthop 2:281–284PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bowen RJ, Guille JT (1994) Critical evaluation of percutaneous epiphysodesis. Advances in operative orthopaedics, vol 2. Mosby-Year Book Inc. pp 341–355Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dewaele J, Fabry G (1992) The timing of epiphyseodesis. A comparative study between the use of the method of Anderson and Green and the Moseley chart. Acta Orthop Belg 58:43–47PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Green WT, Wyatt G, Anderson M (1946) Orthoroentgenography as a method of measuring the bones of the lower extremity. J Bone Joint Surg Am 28:60–71PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lampe HIH, Swierstra BA, Diepstraten AFM (1992) Timing of physiodesis in limb length inequality. Acta Orthop Scand 63:672–674PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Phemister DB (1933) Operative arrestment of longitudinal growth of bones in the treatment of deformities. J Bone Joint Surg Am 15:1–15Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Porat S, Peyser A, Robin GC (1991) Equalization of lower limbs by epiphyseodesis: results of treatment. J Pediatr Orthop 11:442–448PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stephens DC, Herrick W, MacEwen GD (1977) Epiphyseodesis for limb length inequality. Clin Orthop 136:41–48Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bowen TRW, JR GJT, Choi IH (1991) Prospective evaluation of fifty-three consecutive percutaneous epiphyseodesis of the distal femur and proximal tibia and fibula. J Pediatr Orthop 11:350–357PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Inan M, Chan G, Littleton AG, Kubiak P, Bowen JR (2008) Efficacy and safety of percutaneous epiphysiodesis. J Pediatr Orthop 28:648–651PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Khoury JG, Tavares JO, McConnell S, Zeiders G, Sanders JO (2007) Results of screw epiphysiodesis for the treatment of limb length discrepancy and angular deformity. J Pediatr Orthop 27:623–628PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cundy P, Paterson D, Morris L, Foster B (1988) Skeletal age estimation in leg length discrepancy. J Pediatr Orthop 8:513–515PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eastwood DM, Cole W (1995) A graphic method for timing the correction of leg-length discrepancy. J Bone Joint Surg Br 77:743–747PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Little DG, Nigo L, Aiona MD (1996) Deficiencies of current methods for the timing of epiphyseodesis. J Pediatr Orthop 16:173–179PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shapiro F (1982) Developmental patterns in lower-extremity length discrepancies. J Bone Joint Surg Am 64:639–651PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Anderson M, Messner MB, Green WT (1964) Distribution of lengths of the normal femur and tibia in children from one to eighteen years of age. J Bone Joint Surg Am 46:1197–1202PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Green WT, Anderson M (1960) Skeletal growth and the control of bone growth. Instr Lect Am Acad Orthop Surg 17:199–217Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Greulich WW, Pyle SI (1959) Radiographic atlas of skeletal development of the hand and wrist, 2nd ed. Stanford University PressGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Moseley CF (1977) A straight-line graph for leg-length discrepancies. J Bone Joint Surg Am 59:174–179PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Paley D, Bhave A, Herzenberg JE, Bowen JR (2000) Multiplier method for predicting limb-length discrepancy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82-A:1432–1446PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Anderson M, Green WT, Messner MB (1963) Growth and predictions of growth in the lower extremities. J Bone Joint Surg Am 45:1–14Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Moseley CF (1989) Assessment and prediction in leg-length discrepancy. Instr Lect Am Acad Orthop Surg 45:325–330Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kasser JR, Jenkins R (1997) Accuracy of leg length prediction in children younger than 10 years of age. Clin Orthop Relat Res 338:9–13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shapiro F (1987) Longitudinal growth of the femur and tibia after diaphyseal lengthening. J Bone Joint Surg Am 69:684–690PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Westh RN, Menelaus MB (1981) A simple calculation for the timing of epiphyseal arrest. A further report. J Bone Joint Surg Br 63:117–119PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Aguilar JA, Paley D, Paley J, Santpure S, Patel M, Bhave A, Herzenberg JE (2005) Clinical validation of the multiplier method for predicting limb length at maturity, part I. J Pediatr Orthop 25:186–191PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Aguilar JA, Paley D, Paley J, Santpure S, Patel M, Herzenberg JE, Bhave A (2005) Clinical validation of the multiplier method for predicting limb length discrepancy and outcome of epiphysiodesis, part II. J Pediatr Orthop 25:192–196PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kelly PM, Diméglio A (2008) Lower-limb growth: how predictable are predictions? J Child Orthop 2:407–415PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sharma M, MacKenzie WG, Bowen JR (1996) Severe tibial growth retardation in total fibular hemimelia after limb lengthening. J Pediatr Orthop 16:438–444PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • György Szőke
    • 1
  • William G. Mackenzie
    • 2
  • Gyula Domos
    • 1
  • Sándor Berki
    • 1
  • Sándor Kiss
    • 1
  • J. Richard Bowen
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Orthopedic SurgerySemmelweis UniversityBudapestHungary
  2. 2.Alfred I. duPont InstituteWilmingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations