Skip to main content

Long-term Results of Comprehensive Clubfoot Release Versus the Ponseti Method: Which Is Better?

Abstract

Background

Clubfoot can be treated nonoperatively, most commonly using a Ponseti approach, or surgically, most often with a comprehensive clubfoot release. Little is known about how these approaches compare with one another at longer term, or how patients treated with these approaches differ in terms of foot function, foot biomechanics, or quality-of-life from individuals who did not have clubfoot as a child.

Questions/purposes

We compared (1) focused physical and radiographic examinations, (2) gait analysis, and (3) quality-of-life measures at long-term followup between groups of adult patients with clubfoot treated either with the Ponseti method of nonsurgical management or a comprehensive surgical release through a Cincinnati incision, and compared these two groups with a control group without clubfoot.

Methods

This was a case control study of individuals treated for clubfoot at two separate institutions with different methods of treatment between 1983 to 1987. One hospital used only the Ponseti method and the other mainly used a comprehensive clubfoot release. There were 42 adults (24 treated surgically, 18 treated with Ponseti method) with isolated clubfoot along with 48 healthy control subjects who agreed to participate in a detailed analysis of physical function, foot biomechanics, and quality-of-life metrics.

Results

Both treatment groups had diminished strength and motion compared with the control subjects on physical examination measures; however, the Ponseti group had significantly greater ankle plantar flexion ROM (p < 0.001), greater ankle plantar flexor (p = 0.031) and evertor (p = 0.012) strength, and a decreased incidence of osteoarthritis in the ankle and foot compared with the surgical group. During gait the surgical group had reduced peak ankle plantar flexion (p = 0.002), and reduced sagittal plane hindfoot (p = 0.009) and forefoot (p = 0.008) ROM during the preswing phase compared with the Ponseti group. The surgical group had the lowest overall ankle power generation during push off compared with the control subjects (p = 0.002). Outcome tools revealed elevated pain levels in the surgical group compared with the Ponseti group (p = 0.008) and lower scores for physical function and quality-of-life for both clubfoot groups compared with age-range matched control subjects (p = 0.01).

Conclusions

Although individuals in each treatment group experienced pain, weakness, and reduced ROM, they were highly functional into early adulthood. As adults the Ponseti group fared better than the surgically treated group because of advantages including increased ROM observed at the physical examination and during gait, greater strength, and less arthritis. This study supports efforts to correct clubfoot with Ponseti casting and minimizing surgery to the joints, and highlights the need to improve methods that promote ROM and strength which are important for adult function.

Level of Evidence

Level III, prognostic study.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2A–C
Fig. 3A–F
Fig. 4A–B

References

  1. 1.

    Aronson J, Puskarich CL. Deformity and disability from treated clubfoot. J Pediatr Orthop. 1990;10:109–119.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Asperheim MS, Moore C, Carroll NC, Dias L. Evaluation of residual clubfoot deformities using gait analysis. J Pediatr Orthop B. 1995;4:49–54.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Statist Soc B. 1995;57:289–300.

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Celebi L, Muratli HH, Aksahin E, Yagmurlu MF, Bicimoglu A. Bensahel et al. and International Clubfoot Study Group evaluation of treated clubfoot: assessment of interobserver and intraobserver reliability. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2006;15:34–36.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Cooper DM, Dietz FR. Treatment of idiopathic clubfoot: a thirty-year follow-up note. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995;77:1477–1489.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Crawford AH, Marxen JL, Osterfeld DL. The Cincinnati incision: a comprehensive approach for surgical procedures of the foot and ankle in childhood. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982;64:1355–1358.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Delp SL, Statler K, Carroll NC. Preserving plantar flexion strength after surgical treatment for contracture of the triceps surae: a computer simulation study. J Orthop Res. 1995;13:96–104.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    DePuy J, Drennan JC. Correction of idiopathic clubfoot: a comparison of results of early versus delayed posteromedial release. J Pediatr Orthop. 1989;9:44–48.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    DeRosa GP, Stepro D. Results of posteromedial release for the resistant clubfoot. J Pediatr Orthop. 1986;6:590–595.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Dietz FR. On the pathogenesis of clubfoot. Lancet. 1985;1:388–390.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Dobbs MB, Nunley R, Schoenecker PL. Long-term follow-up of patients with clubfeet treated with extensive soft-tissue release. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:986–996.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Haasbeek JF, Wright JG. A comparison of the long-term results of posterior and comprehensive release in the treatment of clubfoot. J Pediatr Orthop. 1997;17:29–35.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Herzenberg JE, Radler C, Bor N. Ponseti versus traditional methods of casting for idiopathic clubfoot. J Pediatr Orthop. 2002;22:517–521.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Hislop H, Montgomery J. Daniel’s and Worthingham’s Muscle Testing: Techniques of Manual Examination. Philadelphia, PA: W.B. Saunders Company; 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Hsu LP, Dias LS, Swaroop VT. Long-term retrospective study of patients with idiopathic clubfoot treated with posterior medial-lateral release. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95:e27.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Inman VT, Ralston HJ, Todd F. Human Walking. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    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;85:1286–1294.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Karol LA, Concha MC, Johnston CE 2nd. Gait analysis and muscle strength in children with surgically treated clubfeet. J Pediatr Orthop. 1997;17:790–795.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS. Radiological assessment of osteo-arthrosis. Ann Rheum Dis. 1957;16:494–502.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Kidder SM, Abuzzahab FS Jr, Harris GF, Johnson JE. A system for the analysis of foot and ankle kinematics during gait. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng. 1996;4:25–32.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Kitaoka HB, Alexander IJ, Adelaar RS, Nunley JA, Myerson MS, Sanders M. Clinical rating systems for the ankle-hindfoot, midfoot, hallux, and lesser toes. Foot Ankle Int. 1994;15:349–353.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Laaveg SJ, Ponseti IV. Long-term results of treatment of congenital club foot. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1980;62:23–31.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Levin MN, Kuo KN, Harris GF, Matesi DV. Posteromedial release for idiopathic talipes equinovarus: a long-term follow-up study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989;242:265–268.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Lunsford BR, Perry J. The standing heel-rise test for ankle plantar flexion: criterion for normal. Phys Ther. 1995;75:694–698.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Lykissas MG, Crawford AH, Eismann EA, Tamai J. Ponseti method compared with soft-tissue release for the management of clubfoot: a meta-analysis study. World J Orthop. 2013;4:144–153.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Magone JB, Torch MA, Clark RN, Kean JR. Comparative review of surgical treatment of the idiopathic clubfoot by three different procedures at Columbus Children’s Hospital. J Pediatr Orthop. 1989;9:49–58.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    McHorney CA, Kosinski M, Ware JE Jr. Comparisons of the costs and quality of norms for the SF-36 health survey collected by mail versus telephone interview: results from a national survey. Med Care. 1994;32:551–567.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    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;113:376–380.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Otremski I, Salama R, Khermosh O, Wientroub S. An analysis of the results of a modified one-stage posteromedial release (Turco operation) for the treatment of clubfoot. J Pediatr Orthop. 1987;7:149–151.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Perry J, Burnfield JM. Gait Analysis: Normal and Pathological Function. 2nd ed. Thorofare, NJ: SLACK; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Porat S, Milgrom C, Bentley G. The history of treatment of congenital clubfoot at the Royal Liverpool Children’s Hospital: improvement of results by early extensive posteromedial release. J Pediatr Orthop. 1984;4:331–338.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Ryoppy S, Sairanen H. Neonatal operative treatment of club foot: a preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1983;65:320–325.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Simons GW. Complete subtalar release in club feet. Part I: A preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1985;67:1044–1055.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Theologis TN, Harrington ME, Thompson N, Benson MK. Dynamic foot movement in children treated for congenital talipes equinovarus. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2003;85:572–577.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Turco VJ. Surgical correction of the resistant club foot: one-stage posteromedial release with internal fixation. A preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1971;53:477–497.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Turco VJ. Resistant congenital club foot: one-stage posteromedial release with internal fixation. A follow-up report of a fifteen-year experience. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1979;61:805–814.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Uglow MG, Clarke NM. The functional outcome of staged surgery for the correction of talipes equinovarus. J Pediatr Orthop. 2000;20:517–523.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Wynne-Davies R. Genetic and environmental factors in the etiology of talipes equinovarus. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1972;84:9–13.

    PubMed  Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Kathryn Reiners, Vickie Young, and Mary Riordan of Shriners Hospitals for Children – Chicago for assistance with data collection during this study.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Adam N. Graf MS.

Additional information

This study was supported by National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (Grant Numbers: H133G060252& H133E10007, principal investigator, PAS). Each author certifies that he or she, or a member of his or her immediate family, has no funding or commercial associations (eg, consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article.

All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request.

Each author certifies that his or her institution approved the human protocol for this investigation, which all investigations were conducted in conformity with ethical principles of research, and that informed consent for participation in the study was obtained.

This work was performed at Shriners Hospitals for Children, Chicago, IL, USA.

About this article

Cite this article

Smith, P.A., Kuo, K.N., Graf, A.N. et al. Long-term Results of Comprehensive Clubfoot Release Versus the Ponseti Method: Which Is Better?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 472, 1281–1290 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-013-3386-8

Download citation

Keywords

  • Gait Analysis
  • Gait Cycle
  • Clubfoot
  • Plantar Flexion
  • Ankle Dorsiflexion