Lower-limb growth: how predictable are predictions?
- PMID: 19308536
- PMCID: PMC2656868
- DOI: 10.1007/s11832-008-0119-8
Lower-limb growth: how predictable are predictions?
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this review is to clarify the different methods of predictions for growth of the lower limb and to propose a simplified method to calculate the final limb deficit and the correct timing of epiphysiodesis.
Background: Lower-limb growth is characterized by four different periods: antenatal growth (exponential); birth to 5 years (rapid growth); 5 years to puberty (stable growth); and puberty, which is the final growth spurt characterized by a rapid acceleration phase lasting 1 year followed by a more gradual deceleration phase lasting 1.5 years. The younger the child, the less precise is the prediction. Repeating measurements can increase the accuracy of predictions and those calculated at the beginning of puberty are the most accurate. The challenge is to reduce the margin of uncertainty. Confrontation of the different parameters-bone age, Tanner signs, annual growth velocity of the standing height, sub-ischial length and sitting height-is the most accurate method. Charts and diagrams are only models and templates. There are many mathematical equations in the literature; we must be able to step back from these rigid calculations because they are a false guarantee. The dynamic of growth needs a flexible approach. There are, however, some rules of thumb that may be helpful for different clinical scenarios.
Calculation of limb length discrepancy: For congenital malformations, at birth the limb length discrepancy must be multiplied by 5 to give the final limb length discrepancy. Multiple by 3 at 1 year of age; by 2 at 3 years in girls and 4 years in boys; by 1.5 at 7 years in girls and boys, by 1.2 at 9 years in girls and 11 years in boys and by 1.1 at the onset of puberty (11 years bone age for girls and 13 years bone age for boys).
Timing of epiphysiodesis: For the timing of epiphysiodesis, several simple principles must be observed to reduce the margin of error; strict and repeated measurements, rigorous analysis of the data obtained, perfect evaluation of bone age with elbow plus hand radiographs and confirmation with Tanner signs. The decision should always be taken at the beginning of puberty. A simple rule is that, at the beginning of puberty, there is an average of 5 cm growth remaining at the knee. There are four common different scenarios: (1) A 5-cm discrepancy-epiphysiodesis of both femur and tibia at the beginning of puberty (11 years bone age girls and 13 years in boys). (2) A 4-cm discrepancy-epiphysiodesis of femur and tibia 6 months after the onset of puberty (11 years 6 months bone age girls, 13 years 6 months bone age boys, tri-radiate cartilage open). (3) A 3-cm discrepancy-epiphysiodesis of femur only at the start of puberty, (skeletal age of 11 years in girls and 13 years in boys). (4) A 2-cm discrepancy-epiphysiodesis of femur only, 1 year after the start of puberty (12 years bone age girls and 14 years in boys).
Figures

















Similar articles
-
Multiplier method for predicting limb-length discrepancy.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000 Oct;82(10):1432-46. doi: 10.2106/00004623-200010000-00010. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000. PMID: 11057472
-
Comparison of Anderson-Green Growth-Remaining Graphs and White-Menelaus Predictions of Growth Remaining in the Distal Femoral and Proximal Tibial Physes.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019 Jun 5;101(11):1016-1022. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.18.01226. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019. PMID: 31169579
-
The pattern of facial skeletal growth and its relationship to various common indexes of maturation.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013 Jun;143(6):845-54. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.01.019. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013. PMID: 23726335
-
Progression or not progression? How to deal with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis during puberty.J Child Orthop. 2013 Feb;7(1):43-9. doi: 10.1007/s11832-012-0463-6. Epub 2012 Dec 11. J Child Orthop. 2013. PMID: 24432058 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Skeletal age assessment from elbow radiographs. Review of the literature.Chir Organi Mov. 2008 May;92(1):1-6. doi: 10.1007/s12306-008-0032-9. Epub 2008 Apr 11. Chir Organi Mov. 2008. PMID: 18408902 Review.
Cited by
-
An improved spreadsheet for calculating limb length discrepancy and epiphysiodesis timing using the multiplier method.J Child Orthop. 2016 Aug;10(4):313-9. doi: 10.1007/s11832-016-0754-4. Epub 2016 Jun 29. J Child Orthop. 2016. PMID: 27357078 Free PMC article.
-
Characteristics of inhomogeneous lower extremity growth and development in early childhood: a cross-sectional study.BMC Pediatr. 2021 Dec 6;21(1):552. doi: 10.1186/s12887-021-02998-1. BMC Pediatr. 2021. PMID: 34872516 Free PMC article.
-
Intestinal malrotation in a female newborn affected by Osteopathia Striata with Cranial Sclerosis due to a de novo heterozygous nonsense mutation of the AMER1 gene.Ital J Pediatr. 2022 Dec 29;48(1):206. doi: 10.1186/s13052-022-01403-6. Ital J Pediatr. 2022. PMID: 36581928 Free PMC article.
-
Dimensions of the anterior cruciate ligament and thickness of the distal femoral growth plate in children: a MRI-based study.Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2023 May;143(5):2363-2372. doi: 10.1007/s00402-022-04441-1. Epub 2022 Apr 19. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2023. PMID: 35438332
-
Prevalence and Predictors of Concomitant Meniscal Surgery During Pediatric and Adolescent ACL Reconstruction: Analysis of 4729 Patients Over 20 Years at a Tertiary-Care Regional Children's Hospital.Orthop J Sports Med. 2024 Mar 20;12(3):23259671241236496. doi: 10.1177/23259671241236496. eCollection 2024 Mar. Orthop J Sports Med. 2024. PMID: 38515604 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Dimeglio A. La coissance en orthopedie. Montpellier: Sauramps; 1987.
-
- Dimeglio A. Growth in pediatric orthopaedics. J Pediatr Orthop. 2001;21(4):549–555. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Research Materials