Management of Musculoskeletal Complications of Hemophilia

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

Prophylactic treatment from ages 2 to 18 years could prevent the development of hemophilic arthropathy if the concentration of the patient's deficient factor is kept from falling below 1% of normal. Early treatment is of paramount importance because the immature skeleton is very sensitive to the complications of hemophilia. Major hemarthrosis and chronic hemophilic synovitis should be treated aggressively to prevent hemophilic arthropathy. When advanced hemophilic arthropathy is present with severe disability, the aim should be to restore function while minimizing the risk to the patient. Joint debridement is an effective method to achieve this goal, especially around the elbow or ankle, and can be considered an alternative to knee replacement in the younger age groups. Proximal tibial valgus osteotomy is a reliable treatment method for painful genu varum of the mobile hemophilic knee. Supramalleolar tibial varus osteotomy is an attractive alternative to the more commonly used surgical option of arthrodesis. Finally, joint replacement can usually be relied on to restore both mobility and function in a diseased joint. The potential benefits of joint replacement must always be weighed against the long-term sequelae, however, especially loosening and consequent revision surgery.

REFERENCES

• 1 Rodriguez-Merchan E C, Goddard N J, Lee C A. Musculoskeletal Aspects of Haemophilia. Oxford: Blackwell Science 2000
  Google Scholar
• 2 Buzzard B, Beeton K. Physiotherapy Management of Haemophilia. Oxford: Blackwell Science 2000
  Google Scholar
• 3 Rodriguez-Merchan E C. Methods to treat haemophilic synovitis.  Haemophilia . 2001;  7 1-5
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Smith M A, Urquhart D R, Savidge G F. The surgical management of varus deformity in haemophilic arthropathy of the knee.  J Bone Joint Surg Br . 1981;  63B 261-265
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Pearce M S, Smith M A, Savidge G F. Supramalleolar tibial osteotomy for haemophilic arthropathy of the ankle.  J Bone Joint Surg Br . 1994;  76B 947-950
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Heim M, Horoszowski H, Varon D, Schulman S, Martinowitz U. The fixed flexed and subluxed knee in the haemophilic child: what should be done?.  Haemophilia . 1996;  1 47-50
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Horoszowski H, Heim M, Schulman S, Varon D, Martinowitz U. Multiple joint procedures in a single operative session on hemophilic patients.  Clin Orthop . 1996;  328 60-64
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Fernandez de Valderrama A J, Matthews J M. The haemophilic pseudotumour or haemophilic subperiosteal haematoma.  J Bone Joint Surg Br . 1965;  47B 256-265
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 9 Gilbert M S. The hemophilic pseudotumor.  Prog Clin Biol Res . 1990;  324 263-268
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 10 Caviglia H A, Fernandez-Palazzi F, Galatro G, Perez-Bianco R, Gilbert M S. Percutaneous treatment of haemophilic pseudotumors. In: Rodriguez-Merchan EC, Goddard NJ, Lee CA, eds. Musculoskeletal Aspects of Haemophilia Oxford: Blackwell Science 2000: 97-104
  Google Scholar
• 11 Ragni M V, Crossett L S, Herndon J H. Postoperative infection following orthopaedic surgery in human immunodeficiency virus-infected hemophiliacs with CD4 counts of < or = 200/ mm³ .  J Arthroplasty . 1995;  10 716-721
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Phillips A M, Sabin C A, Ribbans W J, Lee C A. Orthopaedic surgery in hemophilic patients with human immunodeficiency virus.  Clin Orthop . 1997;  343 81-87
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Rodriguez-Merchan E C. Management of orthopaedic complications of haemophilia.  J Bone Joint Surg Br . 1998;  80B 191-196
  PubMedGoogle Scholar