Literature DB >> 30762436

Comparison of Vickers' Physiolysis With Osteotomy for Primary Correction of Clinodactyly.

Joshua A Gillis1, Michael C Nicoson1, Lorena Floccari1, Joseph S Khouri1, Steven L Moran1.   

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to compare the Vickers physiolysis procedure with osteotomy for correction of digital clinodactyly and determine which method provides better correction at final follow-up or whether the patient's age, preoperative angulation, or presence of syndactyly affects final outcomes.
Methods: All patients of skeletal immaturity who underwent surgical correction of clinodactyly were evaluated with clinical examination and radiographs to determine the percentage and absolute change in the degree of clinodactyly pre- versus postoperatively, in addition to stratification based on the degree of deformity, age, and presence of syndactyly.
Results: Vickers' physiolysis and osteotomy were undertaken in 30 and 11 digits, respectively. The angulation significantly improved from 43.0° to 23.9°, with a 46.2% correction of deformity in the Vickers group at 46.3 months. The angulation decreased from 39.2° to 22.4° in the osteotomy group, with a 55.3% correction of deformity at 55.3 months. There was better correction in those with isolated clinodactyly compared with those with concomitant syndactyly and better percentage of correction in patients with lesser deformity in the Vickers group. There were more reoperations in the osteotomy group. Conclusions: The use of osteotomy may lead to more revision cases, whereas the Vickers procedure has minimal complications and need for revision. The Vickers physiolysis procedure is more effective in those with angulation <55°.

Entities:  

Keywords:  anatomy; congential; diagnosis; digits; hand; pediatric; specialty; surgery

Year:  2019        PMID: 30762436      PMCID: PMC7370396          DOI: 10.1177/1558944719827999

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hand (N Y)        ISSN: 1558-9447


  15 in total

1.  Familial clinodactyly of the fifth finger.

Authors:  Alexander K C Leung; C Pion Kao
Journal:  J Natl Med Assoc       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 1.798

2.  Surgical correction of clinodactyly: two straightforward techniques.

Authors:  Nicole L Strauss; Charles A Goldfarb
Journal:  Tech Hand Up Extrem Surg       Date:  2010-03

3.  The transverse bone in cleft hand: a case cohort analysis of outcome after surgical reconstruction.

Authors:  Alexander W Aleem; Lindley B Wall; M Claire Manske; Valerie Calhoun; Charles A Goldfarb
Journal:  J Hand Surg Am       Date:  2013-12-18       Impact factor: 2.230

4.  Clinodactyly--frequency and morphological implications.

Authors:  B Skvarilová; Z Smahel
Journal:  Acta Chir Plast       Date:  1984

5.  The longitudinal epiphyseal bracket: implications for surgical correction.

Authors:  T R Light; J A Ogden
Journal:  J Pediatr Orthop       Date:  1981       Impact factor: 2.324

6.  Physiolysis for correction of clinodactyly in children.

Authors:  Louise Caouette-Laberge; Caroline Laberge; E Patricia Egerszegi; Constantin Stanciu
Journal:  J Hand Surg Am       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 2.230

Review 7.  Congenital hand differences.

Authors:  Charles A Goldfarb
Journal:  J Hand Surg Am       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 2.230

8.  Clinodactyly. A review of a series of cases.

Authors:  F Burke; A Flatt
Journal:  Hand       Date:  1979-10

9.  Clinodactyly of the little finger: a simple operative technique for reversal of the growth abnormality.

Authors:  D Vickers
Journal:  J Hand Surg Br       Date:  1987-10

10.  Closing wedge osteotomy of abnormal middle phalanx for clinodactyly.

Authors:  Munawar Ali; Teresa Jackson; Ghazi M Rayan
Journal:  J Hand Surg Am       Date:  2009-04-11       Impact factor: 2.230

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Phalangeal Intra-Articular Osteochondroma Caused a Rare Clinodactyly Deformity in Children: Case Series and Literature Review.

Authors:  Yun Hao; Jia-Chao Guo; Xiao-Lin Wang; Jing-Fan Shao; Jie-Xiong Feng; Jin-Peng He
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-08-12       Impact factor: 5.555

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.