Abstract
This is a case of bilateral tibial bowing in an 11 year old girl with osteogenesis imperfecta type IV with telescopic Fassier-Duval rods in situ. Removal of bowed intramedullary implants is not straight forward. We describe the surgical technique in detail. Once the implants were removed, further osteotomies were performed and a more lateral entry point was used to reinsert each Fassier-Duval rod. This ensured the valgus deformity was fully corrected.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download reference work entry PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
- Osteogenesis Imperfecta
- Valgus Deformity
- Osteogenesis Imperfecta Type
- Articular Cartilage Damage
- Plaster Immobilization
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
1 Brief Clinical History
An ambulatory girl with osteogenesis imperfecta type IV was treated medically for osteopenia with intravenous bisphosphonates. At the age of 4 years she underwent surgical correction of bilateral tibial and femoral deformities with multiple osteotomies and insertion of telescopic Fassier-Duval rods . The left tibial rod was exchanged at the age of 6 years due to fracture and deformity. The right femoral rod was exchanged at age of 8 years for the same reason.
Both tibial rods extended with growth leading to a decrease in telescoping between the male and female parts. Progressive valgus deformity in the tibiae led to bending of the rods that ultimately led to no further telescoping. At the age of 11 years the intermalleolar distance was 6 cm and increasing. It was therefore decided to proceed with revision bilateral tibial rodding. This involved removal of the previous implants, repeat tibial osteotomies (one on the right and two on the left) and reinsertion of the telescopic Fassier-Duval rods using a more laterally placed entry point.
2 Preoperative Clinical Photos and Radiographs
See Fig. 1.
3 Preoperative Problem List
-
1.
Bilateral tibial bowing
-
2.
Implants in situ that require removal
-
3.
Poor bone quality
4 Treatment Strategy
-
1.
Stop medical treatment a minimum of 48 h prior to surgery and restart a minimum of 4 months after surgery.
-
2.
Obtain clinically straight tibiae. Careful preoperative planning of the osteotomy sites is important. Intraoperative X-ray images obtained in several planes may lead to changes in the plan.
-
3.
Protect the growing tibiae with telescopic Fassier-Duval rods.
5 Basic Principles
The basic principles of this case are to correct the deformity and prevent future fracture. This is achieved in the following ways:
-
1.
Perform as many osteotomies as necessary to achieve straight bones.
-
2.
Reinsert expandable Fassier-Duval rods to protect the whole length of the growing tibiae.
-
3.
When reinserting the Fassier-Duval rods, use a more lateral entry point to ensure the deformity is fully corrected. If the same entry point is used, some valgus deformity will persist.
6 Images During Treatment
See Fig. 2.
7 Technical Pearls
-
1.
Plan the site of the first osteotomy preoperatively. Use a Midas Rex Microsaw (Medtronic) to start the osteotomy and cut through the Fassier-Duval rod. Once the rod is cut, perform the remaining part of the osteotomy using osteotomes.
-
2.
Bone that has been cut with the Midas Rex Microsaw will be damaged. Remove it using a rangeur.
-
3.
Further tibial osteotomies can be performed percutaneously using multiple drill holes and an osteotome.
8 Outcome Clinical Photos and Radiographs
See Fig. 3.
9 Avoiding and Managing Problems
-
1.
Do not use the largest diameter rod that fits the canal as this can lead to bone resorption.
-
2.
Ensure the threads of the male component are in the epiphysis on the lateral intraoperative X-ray view. The anteroposterior view can be misleading.
-
3.
Ensure the male part is not too long within the knee. This could cause articular cartilage damage.
-
4.
Protect the osteotomies in above-knee plaster immobilization postoperatively and avoid weight bearing for 3 weeks. At this time, ankle-foot orthoses should be fitted to allow weight bearing.
10 See Also in Vol. 3
Case 85: Deformity of the Humerus in a Four Year Old Boy with Osteogenesis Imperfecta
Case 97: Forearm Deformity in a Fourteen-Year-Old Boy with Osteogenesis Imperfecta
References and Suggested Reading
Anam EA, Rauch F, Glorieux FH, Fassier F, Hamdy RC (2015) Osteotomy Healing in Children with Osteogenesis Imperfecta receiving Biphosphonate Treatment. J Bone Miner Res 30(8):1362–1368
Burnei G, Vla C, Georgescu I, Gavriliu T, Dan D (2008) Osteogenesis Imperfecta: diagnosis and treatment. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 16:356–366
Esposito P, Plotkin H (2008) Surgical treatment of osteogenesis imperfecta: current concepts. Curr Opin Pediatr 20:52–57
Fassier F, Glorieux FH (2003) Osteogenesis Imperfecta. In: Surgical techniques in orthopaedics and traumatology. Elsevier SAS, Paris, pp 1–8; 55-050-D-30
Ruck J, Dahan-Oliel M, Montpetit K, Rauch F, Fassier F (2011) Fassier-Duval femoral rodding in children with osteogenesis imperfecta receiving bisphosphonates: functional outcomes at one year. J Child Orthop 5:217–224
Shapiro JR, Sponsellor PD (2009) Osteogenesis Imperfecta: questions and answers. Curr Opin Pediatr 21:709–716
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this entry
Cite this entry
Ashby, E., Hamdy, R.C., Fassier, F. (2015). Case 87: Revision of Bilateral Tibial Fassier-Duval Rods in an Eleven Year Old Girl with Osteogenesis Imperfecta. In: Rozbruch, S., Hamdy, R. (eds) Limb Lengthening and Reconstruction Surgery Case Atlas. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18023-6_336
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18023-6_336
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-18022-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-18023-6
eBook Packages: MedicineReference Module Medicine