Literature DB >> 20610205

Comparison between Ponseti's and Kite's clubfoot treatment methods: a meta-analysis.

Marcos Almeida Matos1, Luiz Antonio Alcântara de Oliveira.   

Abstract

The objective of our study was to compare both Kite's and Ponseti's methods to evidence which one is the most efficient technique in the treatment of congenital idiopathic clubfoot, based on a meta-analysis of current scientific literature. We performed a search of the past 20 years of literature (1986 to 2006) on MEDLINE, LILACS, and EMBASE databases for clinical trials that compared both Kite's and Ponseti's methods. The search in the literature provided 4 selected papers for the meta-analysis. There was a significant difference between the groups, in which the Ponseti's group was more effective in treating congenital clubfoot, considering both primary correction (P = .001) and uncorrected plus relapsed feet (P = .014). In conclusion, our meta-analysis indicates that Ponseti's group in the clubfoot treatment was superior to Kite's group; however, the available studies have some methodological limitations such as small sample sizes and historical control. Copyright 2010 American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20610205     DOI: 10.1053/j.jfas.2010.04.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Foot Ankle Surg        ISSN: 1067-2516            Impact factor:   1.286


  2 in total

1.  Re: P Mang'oli, J Theuri, T Kollmann, NE MacDonald. Ponseti clubfoot management: Experience with the Steenbeek foot abduction brace. Paediatr Child Health 2014;19(10):513-514.

Authors:  Marcos Almeida Matos
Journal:  Paediatr Child Health       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 2.253

2.  Kite versus Ponseti Method in the Treatment of 235 Feet With Idiopathic Clubfoot: Results of a Single Romanian Medical Center.

Authors:  Zoltan Derzsi; Örs Nagy; Horea Gozar; Simona Gurzu; Tudor Sorin Pop
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 1.817

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.