THE CURRENT STATE OF DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT OF THE CONGENITAL TIBIA PSEUDOARTHROSIS

Authors

  • Sergij Khmyzov Sytenko Institute of Spine and Joint Pathology National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6725-0915
  • Yelizaveta Katsalap Sytenko Institute of Spine and Joint Pathology National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv, Ukraine

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15674/0030-59872021385-91

Keywords:

Congenital pseudarthrosis of the tibia, surgery, treatment, neurofibromatosis, children

Abstract

Congenital pseudarthrosis of the tibia (CPT) is a rare disease that is detected with a frequency of 1 in 140–250,000 newborns. The disease is characterized by a wide range of clinical and radiological signs from progressive antecurvature deformation of the tibia to nonunion with a significant bone defect. Changes in the CPT area are caused by the influence of pathologically altered periosteum, which forms a fibrous hamartoma and is responsible for the deformity
of the biomechanical properties of bone tissue. CPT can be formed at the moment of birth or developed spontaneously or as a result of minimal trauma in the early years. The main method of treatment of CPT is a surgery. Nowadays a number of surgical techniques, which are actively used and improved by specialists in the world, has been developed, The most used methods are the Ilizarovʼs method, application of intramedullary fixators, techniques with the use of vascularized tibial autograft, «induced membrane» technique. However, there are a few studies on comparing the effectiveness of different techniques or metal fixatives, most of them are presented in the format of a retrospective analysis of clinical cases series. This is due to the rarity of the disease and the lack of unified approaches on the choice of surgical treatment techniques. The main aim of surgical treatment of CPT is to achieve
consolidation in the area of pseudoarthrosis, which may restore the limb resistance. The part of primary consolidation of CPT after using the surgical treatment various techniques varies very much, range from 60 to 100 %. The percentage of children with CPT tibial amputations has decreased significantly over the past 30 years, which generally indicates an improvement of the results of surgical treatment of the mentioned pathology. However, CPT still remains one of the most difficult diseases of pediatric orthopedics due to the large number of unsatisfactory results and complications after surgery.

Author Biographies

Sergij Khmyzov, Sytenko Institute of Spine and Joint Pathology National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv

MD, Prof. in Traumatology and Orthopaedics

Yelizaveta Katsalap, Sytenko Institute of Spine and Joint Pathology National Academy of Medical Sciences of Ukraine, Kharkiv

MD

References

  1. Eisenberg, K. A., & Vuillermin, C. B. (2019). Management of congenital Pseudoarthrosis of the tibia and fibula. Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine, 12(3), 356-368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-019-09566-2
  2. Hefti, F., Bollini, G., Dungl, P., Fixsen, J., Grill, F., Ippolito, E., ... & Wientroub, S. (2000). Congenital Pseudarthrosis of the tibia: History, etiology, classification, and epidemiologic data. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, Part B, 9(1), 11-15. https://doi.org/10.1097/01202412-200001000-00003
  3. Pannier, S. (2011). Congenital pseudarthrosis of the tibia. Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research, 97(7), 750-761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2011.09.001
  4. Paley, D. (2019). Congenital pseudarthrosis of the tibia: Biological and biomechanical considerations to achieve union and prevent refracture. Journal of Children's Orthopaedics, 13(2), 120-133. https://doi.org/10.1302/1863-2548.13.180147
  5. Congenital Pseudoarthrosis of the tibia redefined: Congenital crural segmental dysplasia. (2006). Limb Lengthening and Reconstruction Surgery, 521-536. https://doi.org/10.3109/9781420014013-39
  6. Ippolito, E., Corsi, A., Grill, F., Wientroub, S., & Bianco, P. (2000). Pathology of bone lesions associated with congenital Pseudarthrosis of the leg. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, Part B, 9(1), 3-10. https://doi.org/10.1097/01202412-200001000-00002
  7. Boyd, H. B. (1982). Pathology and natural history of congenital Pseudarthrosis of the tibia. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, (166), 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-198206000-00003
  8. Crawford, A. H. (1986). Neurofibromatosis in children. Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica, 57(sup218), 8-60. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453678609156819
  9. El-Rosasy, M. A. (2014). Congenital Pseudarthrosis tibia (el-rosasy–paley type 2). Limb Lengthening and Reconstruction Surgery Case Atlas, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02767-8_279-1
  10. Kocaoglu, M., Eralp, L., Bilen, F. E., & Civan, M. (2020). Congenital pseudarthrosis of the tibia: Results of circular external fixation treatment with intramedullary rodding and periosteal grafting technique. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, 54(3), 245-254. https://doi.org/10.5152/j.aott.2020.03.26
  11. Andersen, K. S. (1973). Radiological classification of congenital Pseudarthrosis of the tibia. Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica, 44(6), 719-727. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453677308989112
  12. Pozdeev, A.P., & Zakharyan, E.A. (2014). Features of the course of congenital pseudoarthrosis of the shin bones in children of dystrophic and dysplastic genesis. Orthopedics, traumatology and reconstructive surgery of children, 2(1), 78–84. [in Russian]
  13. Mahnken, A. H., Staatz, G., Hermanns, B., Gunther, R. W., & Weber, M. (2001). Congenital Pseudarthrosis of the tibia in pediatric patients. American Journal of Roentgenology, 177(5), 1025-1029. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.177.5.1771025
  14. Canavese, F., Shah, H., & Rousset, M. (2012). Congenital pseudarthrosis of the tibia: Management and complications. Indian Journal of Orthopaedics, 46(6), 616. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.104184
  15. Ohnishi, I., Sato, W., Matsuyama, J., Yajima, H., Haga, N., Kamegaya, M., ... & Nakamura, K. (2005). Treatment of congenital Pseudarthrosis of the tibia. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, 25(2), 219-224. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.bpo.0000151054.54732.0b
  16. Paterson, D., & Simonis, R. (1985). Electrical stimulation in the treatment of congenital pseudarthrosis of the tibia. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume, 67-B(3), 454-462. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.67b3.3873458
  17. Shabtai, L., Ezra, E., Wientroub, S., & Segev, E. (2015). Congenital tibial pseudarthrosis, changes in treatment protocol. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics B, 24(5), 444-449. https://doi.org/10.1097/bpb.0000000000000191
  18. McFarland, B. (1940). ‘birth fracture’ of the tibia. British Journal of Surgery, 27(108), 706-712. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.18002710809
  19. Ofluoglu, O., Davidson, R. S., & Dormans, J. P. (2008). Prophylactic bypass grafting and long-term bracing in the management of Anterolateral bowing of the tibia and neurofibromatosis-1. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume, 90(10), 2126-2134. https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.g.00272
  20. Pozdeev, A. P., Zakharyan, E. A., & Vilensky, V. A. (2018). Preventive bone grafting in the treatment of the latent form of a congenital pseudarthrosis of the lower leg bones in children. Bulletin of Traumatology and Orthopedics. N. N. Priorova, (3–4), 65–70. [in Russian]
  21. Paley, D., Catagni, M., Argnani, F., Prevot, J., Bell, D., & Armstrong, P. (1992). Treatment of congenital Pseudoarthrosis of the tibia using the Ilizarov technique. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, (280), 81–93. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-199207000-00011
  22. Grill, F., Bollini, G., Dungl, P., Fixsen, J., Hefti, F., Ippolito, E., ... & Wientroub, S. (2000). Treatment approaches for congenital Pseudarthrosis of tibia: Results of the EPOS multicenter study. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, Part B, 9(2), 75-89. https://doi.org/10.1097/01202412-200004000-00002
  23. Choi, I. H., Cho, T., & Moon, H. J. (2011). Ilizarov treatment of congenital Pseudarthrosis of the tibia: A multi-targeted approach using the Ilizarov technique. Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery, 3(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.4055/cios.2011.3.1.1
  24. Paley, D. (2012). Congenital Pseudarthrosis of the tibia: Combined pharmacologic and surgical treatment using Biphosphonate intravenous infusion and bone Morphogenic protein with periosteal and cancellous autogenous bone grafting, tibio-fibular cross union, intramedullary. Bone Grafting. https://doi.org/10.5772/31149
  25. Vilensky, V. A., Zakharyan, E. A., & Pozdeev, A. A. (2018). Treatment of children with congenital deformities of the long bones of the lower extremities by the consistent use of controlled growth and transosseous osteosynthesis (preliminary report). Orthopedics, traumatology and pediatric reconstructive surgery, 6(3), 12–24, https://doi.org/10.17816/PTORS6312-24. [in Russian]
  26. Charnley, J. (1956). Congenital Pseudarthrosis of the tibia treated by the intramedullary nail. The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, 38(2), 283-290. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-195638020-00004
  27. Johnston, C. E. (2002). Congenital pseudarthrosis of the tibia. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume, 84(10), 1799-1810. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200210000-00010
  28. Hamdy, R., Alzahrani, M., & Fassier, F. (2016). Use of the Fassier-Duval telescopic rod for the management of congenital pseudarthrosis of the tibia. Journal of Limb Lengthening & Reconstruction, 2(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.4103/2455-3719.182572
  29. Limb Lengthening and Reconstruction Surgery Case Atlas (2015). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing
  30. Kim, H. W., & Weinstein, S. L. (2002). Intramedullary fixation and bone grafting for congenital Pseudarthrosis of the tibia. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 405, 250-257. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-200212000-00032
  31. Zhu, G., Mei, H., He, R., Liu, Y., Liu, K., Tang, J., & Wu, J. (2016). Combination of intramedullary rod, wrapping bone grafting and Ilizarov’s fixator for the treatment of Crawford type IV congenital pseudarthrosis of the tibia: Mid-term follow up of 56 cases. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-016-1295-1
  32. Tan, J. S., Roach, J. W., & Wang, A. A. (2011). Transfer of ipsilateral fibula on vascular pedicle for treatment of congenital Pseudarthrosis of the tibia. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, 31(1), 72-78. https://doi.org/10.1097/bpo.0b013e318202c243
  33. Iamaguchi, R. B., Fucs, P. M., Da Costa, A. C., Chakkour, I., & Gomes, M. D. (2011). Congenital pseudoarthrosis of the tibia – results of treatment by free fibular transfer and associated procedures – preliminary study. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics B, 20(5), 323-329. https://doi.org/10.1097/bpb.0b013e328347a361
  34. Masquelet, A. C., & Begue, T. (2010). The concept of induced membrane for reconstruction of long bone defects. Orthopedic Clinics of North America, 41(1), 27-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocl.2009.07.011
  35. Taylor, B. C., French, B. G., Fowler, T. T., Russell, J., & Poka, A. (2012). Induced membrane technique for reconstruction to manage bone loss. Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 20(3), 142-150. https://doi.org/10.5435/jaaos-20-03-142
  36. Westberry, D. E., Carpenter, A. M., Tisch, J., & Wack, L. I. (2018). Amputation outcomes in congenital Pseudarthrosis of the tibia. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, 38(8), e475-e481. https://doi.org/10.1097/bpo.0000000000001211
  37. Jeans, K. A., Karol, L. A., Cummings, D., & Singhal, K. (2014). Comparison of gait after Syme and Transtibial amputation in children. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 96(19), 1641-1647. https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.n.00192
  38. McCarthy, R. E. (1982). Amputation for congenital Pseudarthrosis of the tibia. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, (166), 58-61. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-198206000-00009

Downloads

How to Cite

Khmyzov, S. ., & Katsalap, Y. . (2023). THE CURRENT STATE OF DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT OF THE CONGENITAL TIBIA PSEUDOARTHROSIS. ORTHOPAEDICS TRAUMATOLOGY and PROSTHETICS, (3), 85–91. https://doi.org/10.15674/0030-59872021385-91

Issue

No. 3 (2021)

Section

DIGESTS AND REVIEWS

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The authors retain the right of authorship of their manuscript and pass the journal the right of the first publication of this article, which automatically become available from the date of publication under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows others to freely distribute the published manuscript with mandatory linking to authors of the original research and the first publication of this one in this journal.

Authors have the right to enter into a separate supplemental agreement on the additional non-exclusive distribution of manuscript in the form in which it was published by the journal (i.e. to put work in electronic storage of an institution or publish as a part of the book) while maintaining the reference to the first publication of the manuscript in this journal.

The editorial policy of the journal allows authors and encourages manuscript accommodation online (i.e. in storage of an institution or on the personal websites) as before submission of the manuscript to the editorial office, and during its editorial processing because it contributes to productive scientific discussion and positively affects the efficiency and dynamics of the published manuscript citation (see The Effect of Open Access).