eMedicine Specialties > Orthopedic Surgery > Hip

Proximal Femoral Focal Deficiency

Author: Michael G Dennis, MD, Consulting Surgeon, Orthopedic Care and Sports Medicine Center, Aventura Hospital and Medical Center
Coauthor(s): James Hale, MD, Staff Physician, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hospital for Joint Diseases; William L Jaffe, MD, Clinical Professor of Orthopedic Surgery, New York University School of Medicine; Vice Chairman, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hospital for Joint Diseases; David Scher, MD, Clinical Instructor, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hospital for Joint Diseases, New York University
Contributor Information and Disclosures

Updated: Jan 10, 2008

Introduction

Proximal femoral focal deficiency (PFFD) is an uncommon but complex problem. PFFD was commonly grouped with other disorders, such as coxa vara and short bowed femurs, which led to confusion and misunderstanding.1

Problem

In general, in individuals with PFFD, the proximal femur is partially absent, and the entire limb is overall shortened. A few main biomechanical abnormalities are present in children with PFFD, as well as in adults with limb deficiencies. These include limb length discrepancies, malrotation, proximal joint instability, and inadequacy of the proximal musculature.

See also the following related topic in Medscape:
Clinical Quiz - Limb Discrepancies at Birth

Frequency

The incidence of the deficiency ranges from 1 case per 50,000 population to 1 case per 200,000 population.2

Etiology

The etiology of PFFD is not known exactly, but certain theories have been proposed and agents implicated. Sclerotome subtraction is one such theory that has been offered to explain several different limb deficiencies. Specifically, this theory states that injury to the neural crest cells that form the precursors to the peripheral sensory nerves of L4 and L5 results in PFFD.3

A second theory, advanced by Boden et al, states that PFFD may be the result of a defect in proliferation and maturation of chondrocytes in the proximal growth plate.4 Agents implicated in causing such injuries include anoxia, ischemia, irradiation, bacterial and viral infections and toxins, hormones, mechanical energy, and thermal injury.3,5 Thalidomide, when taken by the mother between the fourth and sixth weeks of gestation, has been demonstrated to be a definite cause of PFFD in humans.5 Currently, no evidence indicates a genetic etiology.2,6

Presentation

The appearance of PFFD is not subtle, so it is easily recognized. The femur is shortened, flexed, abducted, and externally rotated.3,5,7 Gillespie noted that, in his patients, the hips were never normal and the knees were dysfunctional.1,8 Flexion contractures of the hip and knee are also present. The bulbous proximal thigh quickly tapers to the knee. Because of the short femur and bulbous thigh, examination of the hip can be difficult. As a result of hip instability, pistoning may be present. The knee is uniformly unstable in an anteroposterior plane secondary to absent cruciate ligaments. Additionally, generalized knee hypoplasia has been reported.1

A high incidence of fibular deficiency and valgus feet is associated with PFFD.5 Fibular deficiencies are found in as many as 70-80% of persons with PFFD. Approximately 50% of patients with PFFD have other limb anomalies.9   However, Aitken reported almost a 70% incidence of other anomalies.10 Cleft palate, clubfoot, congenital heart defects, and spinal anomalies, although rare, occur as well. PFFD is bilateral in 15% of the cases.6

Classification

Several classification systems describe congenital anomalies of the femur, but most have been based on radiographic appearances alone. The Amstutz and Pappas classifications provide detailed radiologic descriptions of the various forms of PFFD that these researchers encountered.11,12 Hamanishi described a progressive reduction of the femur, ranging from simple shortening to total absence.13 Fixsen and Lloyd-Roberts divided their patients into stable and unstable categories.14

Gillespie and Torode reviewed their patients from both a radiographic and, more importantly, a clinical viewpoint and found that most could be divided into 2 groups. The first group included persons with congenital short femurs, and the second group was composed of individuals with true PFFD. These 2 groups not only differed with respect to clinical and radiographic appearances but also were functionally unique and had different surgical and prosthetic requirements.1

The Aitken classification, which is the most widely used classification, divides PFFD into 4 categories based on the radiographic appearance.10 Remember that late ossification may occur, whereby the bone may be present but not visualized radiographically. Occasionally, push-pull comparison radiographs, as well as abduction-adduction views, are necessary to distinguish between class A and class B. Arthrography also can be helpful.3,5

In individuals with Aitken class A, a shortened femur is present proximally, ending at or slightly above the level of the acetabulum. The femoral head is often absent but later ossifies; femoral head presence is indicated by a well-developed acetabulum. Additionally, there is a subtrochanteric defect, which eventually ossifies and thereby establishes bony continuity. After ossification, there is usually a residual subtrochanteric varus deformity.

Persons with class B have a more severe defect or absence of the proximal femur. This defect does not heal spontaneously. At skeletal maturity, there is no connection between the femoral head and proximal femur; the end of the proximal femur is above the acetabulum. The femoral head, although present, may have delayed ossification, and there is often a bony tuft on the proximal end of the shaft.

An individual with Aitken class C has an absent femoral head that does not ossify and a markedly dysplastic acetabulum. The class C femoral shaft is shorter than in a person with class B, in whom the entire proximal femur, including the trochanters, does not develop.

In a person with class D, the most severe form, there is a severely shortened shaft, which often has only an irregularly ossified tuft of bone proximal to the distal femoral epiphysis. No acetabulum is present because the lateral pelvic wall is flat.

In a symposium, Gillespie proposed a more functional classification system in which he divided his patients into 3 treatment groups from a surgical and prosthetic viewpoint.8 His first patient set, group A, consisted of possible candidates for limb lengthening. This group included individuals who had congenitally short femurs but clinically stable hips, had no significant knee flexion contractures, and had the ipsilateral foot at or below the level of the middle of the contralateral tibia. Gillespie's group B consisted of patients classified by Aitken as classes A, B, and C and who required prosthetic treatment. Therefore, any surgical procedure is designed to maximize prosthetic function. Gillespie's group C represented the same patients as Aitken's class D in that they had subtotal absence of the femur. Gillespie also recommended prosthetic treatment for his group C patients; however, these patients did not require knee fusions prior to prosthetic fitting.

A study of the efficacy of MRI in classifying PFFD also compared MRI findings to radiographic classification. The study, which used the Amstutz classification system, found that radiographic evaluation tends to overestimate the degree of deficiency and that, therefore, MRI is the better modality.15

Indications

Indications for lengthening include a limb with a predicted discrepancy at maturity not exceeding 20 cm, a hip that is or can be made stable, and a relatively good knee, ankle, and foot. For other indications related to specific procedures, see Surgical therapy.

Relevant Anatomy

In PFFD, the proximal femur is partially absent, and the entire limb is overall shortened.

Contraindications

If the predicted discrepancy is greater than 20 cm, or if for any other reason the child is not suitable for limb lengthening, prostheses should be considered. For contraindications to specific surgical procedures, see Surgical therapy.

More on Proximal Femoral Focal Deficiency

Overview: Proximal Femoral Focal Deficiency
Workup: Proximal Femoral Focal Deficiency
Treatment: Proximal Femoral Focal Deficiency
References

References

  1. Gillespie R, Torode IP. Classification and management of congenital abnormalities of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Br. Nov 1983;65(5):557-68. [Medline].

  2. Oppenheim WL, Setoguchi Y, Fowler E. Overview and comparison of Syme's amputation and knee fusion with the van Nes rotationplasty procedure in proximal femoral focal deficiency. In: Herring JA, Birch J, eds. The Child With a Limb Deficiency. Chicago, Ill:. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons;1998.

  3. Epps CH. Proximal femoral focal deficiency. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Jul 1983;65(6):867-70. [Medline].

  4. Boden SD, Fallon MD, Davidson R. Proximal femoral focal deficiency. Evidence for a defect in proliferation and maturation of chondrocytes. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Sep 1989;71(8):1119-29. [Medline].

  5. Panting AL, Williams PF. Proximal femoral focal deficiency. J Bone Joint Surg Br. Feb 1978;60(1):46-52. [Medline].

  6. Koman LA, Meyer LC, Warren FH. Proximal femoral focal deficiency: a 50-year experience. Dev Med Child Neurol. Jun 1982;24(3):344-55. [Medline].

  7. Aitken GT. Amputation as a treatment for certain lower-extremity congenital abnormalities. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Oct 1959;41-A:1267-85. [Medline].

  8. Gillespie R. Classification of congenital abnormalities of the femur. In: Herring JA, Birch J, eds. The Child With a Limb Deficiency. Chicago, Ill:. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons;1998.

  9. Grogan DP, Holt GR, Ogden JA. Talocalcaneal coalition in patients who have fibular hemimelia or proximal femoral focal deficiency. A comparison of the radiographic and pathological findings. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Sep 1994;76(9):1363-70. [Medline].

  10. Aitken GT. Proximal femoral focal deficiency-Definition, classification, and management. In: Aitken GT, ed. Proximal Femoral Focal Deficiency. A Congenital Anomaly. Washington, DC:. National Academy of Sciences;1969.

  11. Amstutz HC. The morphology, natural history and treatment of proximal femoral focal deficiencies. In: Aitken GT, ed. Proximal Femoral Focal Deficiency. A Congenital Anomaly. Washington, DC:. National Academy of Sciences;1969.

  12. Pappas AM. Congenital abnormalities of the femur and related lower extremity malformations: classification and treatment. J Pediatr Orthop. Feb 1983;3(1):45-60. [Medline].

  13. Hamanishi C. Congenital short femur. Clinical, genetic and epidemiological comparison of the naturally occurring condition with that caused by thalidomide. J Bone Joint Surg Br. Aug 1980;62(3):307-20. [Medline].

  14. Fixsen JA, Lloyd-Roberts GC. The natural history and early treatment of proximal femoral dysplasia. J Bone Joint Surg Br. Feb 1974;56(1):86-95. [Medline].

  15. Maldjian C, Patel TY, Klein RM, Smith RC. Efficacy of MRI in classifying proximal focal femoral deficiency. Skeletal Radiol. Mar 2007;36(3):215-20. [Medline].

  16. Bernaerts A, Pouillon M, De Ridder K, Vanhoenacker F. Value of magnetic resonance imaging in early assessment of proximal femoral focal deficiency (PFFD). JBR-BTR. Nov-Dec 2006;89(6):325-7. [Medline].

  17. Griffith SI, McCarthy JJ, Davidson RS. Comparison of the complication rates between first and second (repeated) lengthening in the same limb segment. J Pediatr Orthop. Jul-Aug 2006;26(4):534-6. [Medline].

  18. Wick JM, Alexander KM. Rotationplasty--a unique surgical procedure with a functional outcome. AORN J. Aug 2006;84(2):190-214; quiz 215-8. [Medline].

  19. Fuchs B, Sim FH. Rotationplasty about the knee: surgical technique and anatomical considerations. Clin Anat. May 2004;17(4):345-53. [Medline].

  20. Koman LA, Meyer LC, Warren FH. Proximal femoral focal deficiency: natural history and treatment. Clin Orthop. Jan-Feb 1982;(162):135-43. [Medline].

  21. Alman BA, Krajbich JI, Hubbard S. Proximal femoral focal deficiency: results of rotationplasty and Syme amputation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Dec 1995;77(12):1876-82. [Medline].

  22. Friscia DA, Moseley CF, Oppenheim WL. Rotational osteotomy for proximal femoral focal deficiency. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Oct 1989;71(9):1386-92. [Medline].

  23. Kostuik JP, Gillespie R, Hall JE, Hubbard S. Van Nes rotational osteotomy for treatment of proximal femoral focal deficiency and congenital short femur. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Dec 1975;57(8):1039-46. [Medline].

  24. Borggreve J. Kniegelenksersatz durch das in der Beinlangsachse um 180 degree gedrehte fussgelenk. Arch Orthop. 1930;28:175-178.

  25. Van Nes CP. Rotation-plasty for congenital defects of the femur. Making use of the shortened limb to control the knee joint of a prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg. 1950;32B:12-16.

  26. Fowler E, Zernicke R, Setoguchi Y, Oppenheim W. Energy expenditure during walking by children who have proximal femoral focal deficiency. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Dec 1996;78(12):1857-62. [Medline].

  27. Steel HH, Lin PS, Betz RR, et al. Iliofemoral fusion for proximal femoral focal deficiency. J Bone Joint Surg Am. Jul 1987;69(6):837-43. [Medline].

  28. Steel HH. Iliofemoral fusion for proximal femoral focal deficiency. In: Herring, JA, Birch J, eds. The Child With a Limb Deficiency. Chicago, Ill:. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons;1998.

  29. Brown KLB. Rotationplasty with hip stabilization in congenital femoral deficiency. In: Herring JA, Birch J, eds. The Child With a Limb Deficiency. Chicago, Ill:. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons;1998.

  30. Jones DC, Moseley CF. Subluxation of the knee as a complication of femoral lengthening by the Wagner technique. J Bone Joint Surg Br. Jan 1985;67(1):33-5. [Medline].

Further Reading

Keywords

PFFD, absent proximal femur, knee arthrodeses, foot amputation, Van Nes rotationplasty, limb rotationplasty, hip reconstruction, hip stabilization, limb lengthening, iliofemoral arthrodesis

Contributor Information and Disclosures

Author

Michael G Dennis, MD, Consulting Surgeon, Orthopedic Care and Sports Medicine Center, Aventura Hospital and Medical Center
Michael G Dennis, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and American Medical Association
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Coauthor(s)

James Hale, MD, Staff Physician, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hospital for Joint Diseases
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

William L Jaffe, MD, Clinical Professor of Orthopedic Surgery, New York University School of Medicine; Vice Chairman, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hospital for Joint Diseases
William L Jaffe, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, American College of Surgeons, Eastern Orthopaedic Association, and New York Academy of Medicine
Disclosure: Stryker Orthopaedics Consulting fee Speaking and teaching

David Scher, MD, Clinical Instructor, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hospital for Joint Diseases, New York University
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Medical Editor

B Sonny Bal, MD, Associate Professor, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Missouri School of Medicine
B Sonny Bal, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Pharmacy Editor

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD, Senior Pharmacy Editor, eMedicine
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Managing Editor

B Sonny Bal, MD, Associate Professor, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Missouri School of Medicine
B Sonny Bal, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

CME Editor

Dinesh Patel, MD, FACS, Associate Clinical Professor of Orthopedic Surgery, Harvard Medical School; Chief of Arthroscopic Surgery, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital
Dinesh Patel, MD, FACS is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, American Association of Physicians of Indian Origin, American College of International Physicians, and American College of Surgeons
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Chief Editor

William L Jaffe, MD, Clinical Professor of Orthopedic Surgery, New York University School of Medicine; Vice Chairman, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Hospital for Joint Diseases
William L Jaffe, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, American College of Surgeons, Eastern Orthopaedic Association, and New York Academy of Medicine
Disclosure: Stryker Orthopaedics Consulting fee Speaking and teaching

 
 
HONcode

We subscribe to the
HONcode principles of the
Health On the Net Foundation

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright© 1994- by Medscape.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

DISCLAIMER: The content of this Website is not influenced by sponsors. The site is designed primarily for use by qualified physicians and other medical professionals. The information contained herein should NOT be used as a substitute for the advice of an appropriately qualified and licensed physician or other health care provider. The information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only. In no way should it be considered as offering medical advice. Please check with a physician if you suspect you are ill.