Paper 32: Leg Length Changes Following Distal Femoral Osteotomy: Validation of a Predictive Tool and Comparison of Lateral Opening Wedge and Medial Closing Wedge Techniques.

Objectives: A DFO can be performed via two techniques: a lateral opening wedge (LOW) osteotomy and a medial closing wedge (MCW) osteotomy. Small case series have looked at how leg length is affected by a lateral opening wedge DFO, however, there is a lack of research comparing these leg length changes to medial closing DFO. Additionally, no studies have presented a model for predicting the leg length changes that will occur following DFO of either technique. Given that limb length differences can lead to accelerated osteoarthritis, back pain, hip pain, and other issues, being able to predict which technique can help prevent this pathology without a secondary procedure would be an important finding. Finally, the medial closing wedge osteotomy can allow for immediate weight-bearing while the lateral opening wedge does not and typically has associated cost with bone grafting. Therefore, we designed this study to validate a tool designed to predict leg length changes after distal femoral osteotomy (DFO) and compare changes following medial closing wedge (MCW) and lateral opening wedge (LOW) techniques. Methods: A collaborative retrospective review was performed of patients from Rush and Mayo Clinic databases who received a DFO and had full-length standing radiographs both pre-and postoperatively. For each preoperative radiograph, the region on the medial (for LOW) or lateral (for MCW) distal femur cortex that would be the "hinge point" during DFO was identified. The distances from the center of the femoral head to the hinge point ("A"), from the hinge point to the center of the tibial plafond ("B"), and the resultant angle at the hinge point ("α") were measured (Figure 1). Figure 2 demonstrates the equation used to plot a graph of the predicted leg length changes corresponding to the change in α angle produced by DFO. Final leg length was calculated on postoperative radiographs, and the difference between predicted and true leg length changes was compared using paired Wilcoxon signed rank exact tests. Results: 10 MCW and 10 LOW patients were included. For both LOW (n=10) and MCW (n=10) osteotomies, the predicted leg length change was equivalent to the true change measured on postoperative radiographs (LOW P=0.16; MCW P=0.85). LOW DFO's had 5.10 ± 2.77 mm (range: 1.45-10.87 mm) of leg lengthening, compared to 2.61 ± 1.25 mm (range: 0.50-4.56 mm) of leg shortening (p<0.001) for MCW (Figure 3). On average, there was 0.85 mm of lengthening (range 0.5-1.3 mm) for every 1° of mechanical axis correction with LOW DFO, compared to 0.45 mm of shortening (range: 0.1-1.4 mm) per 1° of MCW correction. Conclusions: This study presents a tool to accurately and reliably predict the leg length changes seen after both medial closing and lateral opening wedge DFO's. Knowing what leg length changes to expect with each DFO technique is a useful tool that surgeons can utilize during surgical planning. Preoperative radiographic imaging can be used to predict leg length change following DFO with high reliability and accuracy. Surgeons can expect approximately 0.85mm of lengthening per 1° of DFO correction when performing LOW, compared to 0.45mm of shortening per 1° correction for MCW osteotomies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]