Manon Pigeolet, Jabbar Ghufran Syed, Sadia Ahmed, Muhammad A Chinoy, Mansoor A Khan
{"title":"Percutaneous Achilles tendon tenotomy in clubfoot with a blade or a needle: a single-centre randomized controlled noninferiority trial.","authors":"Manon Pigeolet, Jabbar Ghufran Syed, Sadia Ahmed, Muhammad A Chinoy, Mansoor A Khan","doi":"10.1302/0301-620X.106B8.BJJ-2024-0094.R1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>The gold standard for percutaneous Achilles tendon tenotomy during the Ponseti treatment for idiopathic clubfoot is a tenotomy with a No. 15 blade. This trial aims to establish the technique where the tenotomy is performed with a large-bore needle as noninferior to the gold standard.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We randomized feet from children aged below 36 months with idiopathic clubfoot on a 1:1 basis in either the blade or needle group. Follow-up was conducted at three weeks and three months postoperatively, where dorsiflexion range, Pirani scores, and complications were recorded. The noninferiority margin was set at 4° difference in dorsiflexion range at three months postoperatively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The blade group had more dorsiflexion at both follow-up consultations: 18.36° versus 18.03° (p = 0.115) at three weeks and 18.96° versus 18.26° (p = 0.001) at three months. The difference of the mean at three months 0.7° is well below the noninferiority margin of 4°. There was no significant difference in Pirani scores. The blade group had more extensive scar marks at three months than the needle group (8 vs 2). No major complications were recorded.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The needle tenotomy is noninferior to the blade tenotomy for usage in Ponseti treatment for idiopathic clubfoot in children aged below 36 months.</p>","PeriodicalId":48944,"journal":{"name":"Bone & Joint Journal","volume":"106-B 8","pages":"871-878"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bone & Joint Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.106B8.BJJ-2024-0094.R1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aims: The gold standard for percutaneous Achilles tendon tenotomy during the Ponseti treatment for idiopathic clubfoot is a tenotomy with a No. 15 blade. This trial aims to establish the technique where the tenotomy is performed with a large-bore needle as noninferior to the gold standard.
Methods: We randomized feet from children aged below 36 months with idiopathic clubfoot on a 1:1 basis in either the blade or needle group. Follow-up was conducted at three weeks and three months postoperatively, where dorsiflexion range, Pirani scores, and complications were recorded. The noninferiority margin was set at 4° difference in dorsiflexion range at three months postoperatively.
Results: The blade group had more dorsiflexion at both follow-up consultations: 18.36° versus 18.03° (p = 0.115) at three weeks and 18.96° versus 18.26° (p = 0.001) at three months. The difference of the mean at three months 0.7° is well below the noninferiority margin of 4°. There was no significant difference in Pirani scores. The blade group had more extensive scar marks at three months than the needle group (8 vs 2). No major complications were recorded.
Conclusion: The needle tenotomy is noninferior to the blade tenotomy for usage in Ponseti treatment for idiopathic clubfoot in children aged below 36 months.
期刊介绍:
We welcome original articles from any part of the world. The papers are assessed by members of the Editorial Board and our international panel of expert reviewers, then either accepted for publication or rejected by the Editor. We receive over 2000 submissions each year and accept about 250 for publication, many after revisions recommended by the reviewers, editors or statistical advisers. A decision usually takes between six and eight weeks. Each paper is assessed by two reviewers with a special interest in the subject covered by the paper, and also by members of the editorial team. Controversial papers will be discussed at a full meeting of the Editorial Board. Publication is between four and six months after acceptance.