Comparative analysis of correction of idiopathic congenital talipes equinovarus by conventional and accelerated Ponseti method with minimum 12 months follow up in a tertiary care hospital in North India

Background: Congenital talipes equinovarus varus (CTEV) is one of the most common congenital anomalies of foot and ankle affecting 1/1000 live birth approximately. With a male dominance pattern, this deformity is bilateral in 50% cases. It has four basic components: cavus, adduction, varus and equinus. Severity of clubfoot is accessed using Pirani score (0 to 6). Insights into the basic pathoanatomy of this complex 3 dimensional deformity has helped to correct it using the method given by Ignacio Ponseti, a Spanish orthopaedician, in which serial manipulations of foot are done and weekly casts are applied, followed by a tendoachilles tenotomy in selected cases to correct the equinus component which is then followed by splintage of the feet in Steenbeek splint initially for 23 hours day for 3 months and then 12 hours a day for 3 years. The most important component of this treatment is parental counselling regarding the need for compliance with treatment which is often loophole responsible for relapse in initially corrected feet.Methods: This was a prospective study including 40 patients (61 feets) of idiopathic clubfoot with age <3 month at presentation who were randomly distributed in two groups, group 1 (accelerated Ponseti casting group) in which twice weekly casts were applied and group 2 (standard Ponseti casting group) in which weekly casts were applied. Initial Pirani score was calculated in all the patients and was rechecked and documented in every successive visit. All the patients were followed upto 12 months and there was no lost to follow up in this study.Results: The mean days of plaster duration in accelerated casting group was 18.45 days as compared to 47.25 days in standard casting group (statistically significant, p value <0.05). Also, Pirani score at the end of last follow up was comparable in both the groups. Tenotomy rate was slightly higher in accelerated casting group (89.5%) as compared to standard group (85.7%) which may be attributed to higher initial Pirani score in former (5.5) as compared to later (5.0).Conclusions: Accelerated biweekly Ponseti casting reduces the overall days of treatment with similar results compared to standard weekly casting regime.

A COMPARATIVE STUDY TO EVALUATE THE OUTCOME OF PONSETI'S TECHNIQUE AND ACCELERATED PONSETI'S TECHNIQUE FOR CORRECTION OF CLUBFOOT

Introduction: Clubfoot is a common congenital deformity with incidence of1-6.8/1000 live births. Ponseti method is currently the gold standard for treatment of clubfoot which conventionally involves weekly plaster changes. A prospective comparative study was carried out at our hospital where we compared one group with weekly plaster change to other group with twice weekly plaster change, using the classical Ponseti protocol of manipulation. A total 50 feet (36 children ), divided into two Methods: groups, were randomly allocated to either Group 1 – 25 feet(accelerated Ponseti) or Group 2 – 25 feet (standard Ponseti). Group 2 underwent serial manipulations and casting once a week and Group 1 received manipulations and castings twice a week. Pirani score was documented at the time of presentation, after each cast, and at the time of removalof nal cast to assess the success of treatment ( Pirani score ≤1). A tota Results: l 43 feet (29 patients) underwent the entire course of treatment, while 7 patients discontinued the treatment during the course of the study. 14 patients, i.e, 21 feet were treated with Accelerated Ponseti Protocol (APP),i.e Group -1, and 15 patients, i.e, 22 feet were treated with Standard Ponseti Protocol (SPP), i.e Group-2. Mean duration of treatment from the rst cast to tenotomy in the accelerated ponseti protocol group was 20.57 ± 4.5 days (ranging from 12 to 29 days), and in standard ponseti protocol group was 39.66 ± 6.9 days (ranging from 29 to 51 days). Conclusion: Both the methods proved to be equally efcacious for the management of clubfoot in our study. However, the accelerated method had an overall shorter treatment duration making it convenient for the parents. As the patient is under direct observation of surgeons, complications, in any, are detected early and easily. Overall, the accelerated technique is more practical, benecial, and equally efcacious as standard ponseti technique, providing a more rapid correction of the deformity.

Accelerated versus standard Ponseti method for idiopathic congenital talipes equinovarus: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background. The standard Ponseti method is a mainstay of treatment for children with congenital talipes equinovarus (CTEV); involving weekly manipulation and long-leg casting, this approach has proven to produce good long-term outcomes. However, it takes approximately 45 weeks to correct all deformity components, making compliance a challenge for patients with limited economic resources and difficulty reaching healthcare centres. Aim. This study aims to compare treatment outcomes between standard Ponseti and an accelerated protocol applying the same casts but changing them more frequently, every 2-5 days for the CTEV pathology. Methods. A systematic search was conducted based on PRISMA guidelines to identify relevant studies through PubMed, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Database. A total of seven studies (324 patients, 408 feet) were included in the meta-analysis. Five outcomes were compared between the two procedures: post-procedure Pirani score, relapse rate, tenotomy rate, number of casts, and total duration of treatment. Results. For total duration of treatment, the accelerated Ponseti method was superior to standard Ponseti (24.25 vs. 41.54 days, p 0.00001). On the other hand, it achieved comparable efficacy as measured by post-procedure Pirani score (1.01 vs. 0.87, p = 0.19). Furthermore, the two procedures were also comparable in terms of the total number of casts needed (4.94 vs. 5.05, p = 0.76), tenotomy rate (73.29% vs. 65.27%, p = 0.07) , and relapse rate (27.72% vs 25.23%, p = 0.56). Conclusion. Accelerated Ponseti offers similar efficacy and shorter duration of treatment compared to the standard Ponseti technique.