Skip to main content
. 2014 Aug 12;2014(8):CD008602. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008602.pub3

El‐Deeb 2007.

Methods Quasi‐RCT. Two‐arm parallel‐group design
Participants 46 participants with 66 feet with resistant idiopathic CTEV, referred to a single centre
Inclusion criteria: idiopathic CTEV which failed conservative treatment (techniques unknown), requiring posteromedial soft tissue release
Exclusion criteria: none stated
PARTICIPANT CHARACTERISTICS
Age mean (range) in months: 9 (3 to 24)
Sex male (%): 89%
Characteristics of feet: 11 left, 15 right, 20 bilateral
Baseline severity: 51 feet Dimeglio grade IV (very severe), 15 feet Dimeglio grade III (severe)
Talocalcaneal interosseous ligament released
Characteristics of feet: not stated
Talocalcaneal interosseous ligament not released
Characteristics of feet: not stated
Interventions Talocalcaeal interosseous ligament release versus control in posteromedial soft tissue release for resistant CTEV
Randomisation of feet (not participants)
Feet were allocated equally on an alternate basis
Postoperative care was the same in both groups. Long leg plaster in corrected position which was then changed every 3 weeks into an overcorrected position. Total time immobilised in cast was 12 weeks. Antivarus boots or splints then worn for one year
Follow‐up average in months: 28 (24 to 36)
Outcomes Radiological: x‐ray
Radiological: MRI scans at 5 months postoperatively in 40 participants (20 from each group)
Scoring system based on combination of clinical and radiographic outcomes at an average of 28 months (range, 24 to 36 months)
Notes  
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) High risk Alternate sequence generation
Allocation concealment (selection bias) High risk Alternate sequence generation
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) 
 All outcomes High risk Unable to blind intervention provider. Unsure if assessors were blinded. Unsure if families were aware which surgery was done
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk Some participants had MRI scans. Unable to provide to all participants due to logistics and cost, unsure how the limited numbers were selected
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Unclear risk The Simons system of reporting was modified. Mentioned cosmetic appearance, clinical range and strength, but did not report on these
Other bias Unclear risk Unsure if groups were comparable at baseline