Background:

Although the Ponseti method has been used with great success in a variety of nonidiopathic clubfoot deformities, the efficacy of this treatment in clubfeet associated with Down syndrome remains unreported. The purpose of this study is, therefore, to compare treatment characteristics and outcomes of clubfoot patients with Down syndrome to those with idiopathic clubfoot treated with the Ponseti method.

Methods:

An Institutional Review Board-approved, retrospective review of prospectively gathered data were performed at a single pediatric hospital over an 18-year period. Patients with either idiopathic clubfeet or clubfeet associated with Down syndrome who were less than 1 year of age at the outset of treatment were treated by the Ponseti method, and had a minimum of 2 year’s follow-up were included. Initial Dimeglio score, number of casts, need for heel cord tenotomy, recurrence, and need for further surgery were recorded. Outcomes were classified using the Richards classification system: “good” (plantigrade foot +/- heel cord tenotomy), “fair” (need for a limited procedure), or “poor” (need for a full posteromedial release).

Results:

Twenty clubfeet in 13 patients with Down syndrome and 320 idiopathic clubfeet in 215 patients were identified. Average follow-up was 73 months for the Down syndrome cohort and 62 months for the idiopathic cohort. Down syndrome patients presented for treatment at a significantly older age (61 vs. 16 d, P=0.00) and with significantly lower average initial Dimeglio scores than the idiopathic cohort (11.3 vs. 13.4, P=0.02). Heel cord tenotomy was performed in 80% of the Down syndrome cohort and 79% of the idiopathic cohort (P=1.00). Recurrence rates were higher in the Down syndrome cohort (60%) compared with the idiopathic group (37%), but this difference was not statistically significant (P=0.06). Need for later surgical procedures was similar between the 2 cohorts, though recurrences in the Down syndrome group were significantly less likely to require intra-articular surgery (8.3% vs. 65.5%, P=0.00). Clinical outcomes were 95% “good,” 0% “fair,” and 5% “poor” in the Down syndrome cohort and 69% “good,” 27% “fair,” and 4% “poor” in the idiopathic cohort (P=0.01).

Conclusions:

Despite the milder deformity and an older age at presentation, clubfeet associated with Down syndrome have similar rates of recurrence and may have better clinical outcomes when compared with their idiopathic counterparts. When deformities do relapse in Down syndrome patients, significantly less intra-articular surgery is required than for idiopathic clubfeet.

Level of evidence:

Level III.