[Multiple long bone fractures in a child with pycnodysostosis. A case report].

Journal and index pages often block iframe embedding. This reader keeps the evidence details in Orthonotes and leaves the source page one click away.

Abstract

[Indexed for MEDLINE] 20. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001 Feb;83(2):247-54. doi: 10.2106/00004623-200102000-00013. Altered fibular growth patterns after tibiofibular synostosis in children. Frick SL(1), Shoemaker S, Mubarak SJ. Author information: (1)Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Children's Hospital--San Diego, California 92123-4208, USA. sfrick@carolinas.org BACKGROUND: Iatrogenic synostosis of the tibia and fibula following an operation on the leg in a child has been reported rarely in the literature, and the effects of this complication on future growth, alignment, and function are not known. This is a retrospective case series, from one institution, of crossunions of the distal parts of the tibia and fibula complicating operations on the leg in children. The purpose is to alert surgeons to this possible complication. METHODS: The senior author identified eight cases of iatrogenic tibiofibular synostosis seen in children since 1985. The patients had various diagnoses and were from the practices of four pediatric orthopaedic surgeons. Synostosis developed in six patients after osteotomies of the distal parts of the tibia and fibula, in one after internal fixation of distal tibial and fibular metaphyseal fractures through a single incision, and in one after posterior transfer of the anterior tibialis tendon through the interosseous membrane combined with peroneus brevis transfer to the calcaneus. Medical records were reviewed, and preoperative and follow-up radiographs were analyzed for changes in the relative positions of the proximal and distal tibial and fibular physes and in the alignment of the ankle. RESULTS: Five patients were symptomatic after crossunion; they presented with prominence of the proximal part of the fibula, ankle deformity, or ankle pain. Three patients were asymptomatic, and a synostosis was identified on routine follow-up radiographs. Intraoperative technical errors caused two of the crossunions; the cause of the others was unknown. Following tibiofibular synostosis, growth disturbances were noted radiographically in every patient. The normal growth pattern of distal migration of the fibula relative to the tibia was reversed, resulting in a decreased distance between the proximal physes of the tibia and fibula as well as proximal migration of the distal fibular physis relative to the distal part of the tibia. Shortening of the lateral malleolus led to greater valgus alignment of the ankle. CONCLUSIONS: Tibiofibular synostosis can complicate an operation on the leg in a child. After crossunion, the normal distal movement of the fibula relative to the tibia is disrupted, resulting in shortening of the lateral malleolus and ankle valgus as well as prominence of the fibular head at the knee. The synostosis also interferes with the normal motion that occurs between the tibia and fibula with weight-bearing, potentially leading to ankle pain. DOI: 10.2106/00004623-200102000-00013