4.0 Article

Clinico-radiological factors predicting the failure risk of conservative management in moderate to severe pediatric idiopathic flexible flatfoot

Journal

JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC ORTHOPAEDICS-PART B
Volume 31, Issue 2, Pages E213-E218

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/BPB.0000000000000939

Keywords

child; conservative management; flexible flatfoot; surgery

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigated the clinico-radiological factors associated with future surgical treatment in patients with pediatric flexible flatfoot (FFF) who first visited the orthopedic clinic before the age of 10 years. The study found that unilateral involvement, older age, smaller calcaneal pitch angle, and higher talo-first metatarsal malalignment were high-risk factors for pediatric FFF surgery.
This study aimed to investigate the clinico-radiological factors of related future surgical treatment in patients with pediatric flexible flatfoot (FFF) who first visited the orthopedic clinic before the age of 10 years. Sixty-five patients diagnosed with moderate/severe idiopathic FFF deformity between the ages of 2-10 years were included. We developed prognostic models for the risk of the surgery during the follow-up period. Twenty (30.8%) patients required surgical treatment, and all of them underwent calcaneal lengthening osteotomy. Among them, 7 (10.8%) patients required concomitant Achilles-lengthening surgery. Unilateral involvement, older age, smaller calcaneal pitch angle, and higher talo-first metatarsal malalignment were considered high-risk factors for pediatric FFF surgery. Prognostic models identified three prognostic risk groups based on those factors, and survival curves revealed significant differences among the groups. Our prognostic models help predict the failure risk of conservative management of pediatric idiopathic FFF. Level of Evidence: Level III, prognostic study.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available