Blount Disease Diagnosis: A Comprehensive Guide for Healthcare Professionals

Introduction

Blount disease, medically termed tibia vara, represents an acquired genu varus deformity affecting children. This condition arises from excessive compressive forces exerted on the proximal medial metaphysis of the tibia, consequently disrupting normal enchondral bone formation. Blount disease can manifest unilaterally or bilaterally and is categorized into infantile and adolescent forms, distinguished primarily by the age of onset and clinical presentation. Early and accurate Blount Disease Diagnosis is crucial for effective management and to prevent progressive deformity.

While risk factors such as obesity, early ambulation, and African-American ethnicity are well-documented in the development of Blount disease, the precise underlying pathophysiology remains an area of ongoing research. Management strategies for Blount disease range from conservative bracing to surgical interventions, tailored to the patient’s age and the severity of the condition at diagnosis. Treatment modalities include knee-ankle-foot orthoses (KAFOs), corrective proximal tibial osteotomies with acute or gradual fixation techniques, and hemiepiphysiodesis. This article provides an in-depth review of the etiology, pathophysiology, Blount disease diagnosis, evaluation, and current management strategies, aiming to equip healthcare professionals with the essential knowledge to optimize patient care and outcomes for this distinct orthopedic condition.

Etiology of Blount Disease

The etiology of Blount disease is multifactorial, involving a complex interplay of biological and mechanical factors. While mechanical overload on the proximal tibia is a significant contributing factor, especially in children with obesity and early walking patterns, it is not the sole determinant. The occurrence of infantile Blount disease in normal-weight children and the higher prevalence observed in African-American populations suggest a potential genetic predisposition. Therefore, in addition to mechanical stress, genetic susceptibility is increasingly recognized as a crucial element in the development of Blount disease. Further research is needed to fully elucidate the genetic and environmental factors contributing to this condition and refine Blount disease diagnosis approaches by identifying at-risk populations early.

Epidemiology of Blount Disease

The exact prevalence of Blount disease is difficult to ascertain due to variations in diagnostic criteria and reporting methods across different populations. However, it is recognized as a significant cause of genu varum, particularly in specific demographic groups. Studies have indicated a higher incidence among African-American children compared to Caucasian children, suggesting a potential genetic or environmental component linked to ethnicity. Obesity is another strong epidemiological factor, with overweight and obese children being at a significantly increased risk of developing Blount disease, highlighting the role of mechanical loading in the condition’s pathogenesis. Geographic variations in prevalence have also been noted, potentially reflecting differences in lifestyle, genetic backgrounds, and environmental exposures. Understanding the epidemiology of Blount disease is essential for public health initiatives focused on early detection and preventative strategies, ultimately improving Blount disease diagnosis rates and timely intervention.

Pathophysiology of Blount Disease

The fundamental pathophysiology of Blount disease centers on growth inhibition stemming from excessive compressive forces acting on the proximal tibial physis. This mechanical overload leads to damage of the cartilage and subsequent disruption of ossification processes. The altered enchondral bone formation is a hallmark of the disease progression. Compressive forces are typically most pronounced at the posteromedial aspect of the physis. This localized pressure results in disproportionate growth inhibition on the medial side of the knee, leading to the progressive development of a varus deformity. The condition is not merely a bending of the bone, but a true growth disorder affecting the physis. Understanding this pathophysiology is crucial for guiding treatment strategies and improving the accuracy of Blount disease diagnosis, particularly in differentiating it from physiological bowing.

History and Physical Examination in Blount Disease Diagnosis

A thorough history and physical examination are paramount in the Blount disease diagnosis process. Clinically, genu varum, or bowlegs, is considered a normal physiological variant in children up to the age of 2. Typically, lower limb alignment transitions towards valgus, reaching its peak around 3 years of age. Persistent genu varum beyond this age, especially in children who are overweight, should raise suspicion for Blount disease. As the condition progresses, the knee deformity worsens, evolving into a complex three-dimensional deformity characterized by varus, procurvatum (anterior bowing), internal tibial rotation, and potentially limb length discrepancy.

Infantile Blount Disease

Infantile Blount disease is typically diagnosed in children between 1 and 3 years old. It often presents bilaterally with a noticeable varus deformity of the tibia and internal tibial torsion. Pain is usually absent in the early stages. A palpable bony prominence, often described as a “beak,” may be felt over the medial aspect of the proximal tibial condyle. A critical clinical finding is the presence of lateral thrust, which is observed as a lateral shift of the knee joint during weight-bearing. This indicates instability and is a strong indicator for Blount disease diagnosis. If left untreated, irreversible asymmetric medial proximal tibial epiphysiodesis can develop around 6 to 8 years of age, rendering conservative treatments less effective.

Adolescent Blount Disease

Adolescent Blount disease typically emerges in older children and early adolescents. Unlike the infantile form, it is frequently associated with pain on the medial aspect of the knee. Adolescent Blount disease is often unilateral and has a strong correlation with being overweight or obese. It may also involve associated abnormalities of the distal femur. Due to the later onset and different clinical presentation, Blount disease diagnosis in adolescents requires careful consideration of other potential causes of knee pain and deformity.

Evaluation and Blount Disease Diagnosis

Definitive Blount disease diagnosis relies on a combination of clinical assessment and radiographic findings. History, physical examination, and plain radiography are generally sufficient to confirm the diagnosis.

Radiographic Evaluation

Initial radiographic evaluation involves long-leg anteroposterior (AP) radiographs. These images should be bilateral, extending from the hips to the ankles, to allow for accurate assessment of limb alignment and measurement of varus deformity.

Radiographic Indicators of Blount Disease:

Several radiographic features are indicative of Blount disease:

• Medial Beaking of the Epiphysis: A characteristic pointed or beak-like appearance of the medial tibial epiphysis.
• Widened and Irregular Medial Physis: The growth plate on the medial side of the proximal tibia appears broadened and structurally irregular.
• Irregular Ossification: Disrupted and uneven bone formation in the medial proximal tibia.
• Medial Slope of the Epiphysis and Metaphysis in Varus: The epiphysis and metaphysis exhibit an abnormal medial angulation in the varus plane.

Key Radiographic Angles for Blount Disease Detection:

Specific angle measurements are crucial for objective assessment and Blount disease diagnosis.

• Metaphyseal-Diaphyseal Angle (MDA): This angle, formed between a line perpendicular to the proximal tibial physis and the tibial shaft axis, is a critical parameter. An MDA greater than 11° is strongly suggestive of Blount disease and its potential progression. The MDA is a reliable indicator for differentiating Blount disease from physiological bowing.

• Tibiofemoral Angle: This angle measures the overall severity of the varus deformity in the leg. While it is a general measure of bowing, it complements other specific angles in assessing Blount disease.

• Medial Metaphyseal Beak Angle (MMBA): The MMBA quantifies the degree of medial beaking. When used in conjunction with the MDA, the MMBA enhances diagnostic accuracy, potentially leading to earlier Blount disease diagnosis and timely intervention.

• Levine-Drennan Angle: This angle, while less commonly used than MDA, also assesses the relationship between the tibial shaft and the proximal tibial growth plate and can be elevated in Blount disease. An angle exceeding 11° is considered indicative of the condition.

Langenskiöld Classification System:

The Langenskiöld classification system is a widely used radiographic staging method for infantile Blount disease. It categorizes the disease into six stages based on the progressive severity of medial physeal collapse. This staging system is invaluable for prognosis and treatment planning.

Langenskiöld Stages:

• Stage I: Irregularity of the metaphyseal zone.
• Stage II: Medial metaphyseal beaking is evident.
• Stage III: Development of a “step” in the metaphyseal beak.
• Stage IV: Epiphysis beaking and occupying a pit in the medial metaphysis.
• Stage V: Double epiphyseal plate formation.
• Stage VI: Bony bar formation across the physis, indicating growth arrest.

Progression through these stages indicates increasing severity of Blount disease. Stages V and VI signify more advanced disease with physeal bar formation, often leading to significant angular deformity and limb length discrepancies. While X-ray based Langenskiöld classification remains the most commonly used, MRI-based classifications, such as Fort-de-France (FDF), are emerging as valuable tools, especially for assessing early cartilaginous changes.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)

While plain radiographs are typically sufficient for Blount disease diagnosis, MRI can be a valuable adjunct in certain situations. MRI excels at visualizing soft tissues, including cartilage, menisci, ligaments, and the vascularity of the physis. It is more sensitive than radiographs in detecting early cartilaginous changes, which can be particularly useful in early or ambiguous cases. Gadolinium-enhanced MRI can be beneficial in pediatric patients with neglected or delayed presentations of Blount disease observed after age 4 but before radiographic epiphysiodesis has occurred. MRI can help assess the extent of physeal involvement and rule out other conditions.

Treatment and Management of Blount Disease

Treatment strategies for Blount disease are dictated by the child’s age at Blount disease diagnosis, the severity of the deformity as staged by the Langenskiöld classification, and the presence of risk factors. Preoperative assessment of skeletal age is important, as it influences the timing and potential success of different interventions. The overarching goals of treatment are to restore normal joint and limb alignment, equalize limb lengths at skeletal maturity, and prevent recurrence of the deformity.

Bracing

Knee-ankle-foot orthoses (KAFOs) are a primary non-surgical treatment option for children diagnosed before age 4 with Langenskiöld stage I or II Blount disease. The brace extends from the upper thigh to the foot and applies a valgus force at the knee to counteract the varus deformity. Bracing is most effective when initiated before age 3 in non-obese children and when the brace is consistently worn, often primarily at night. The typical duration of brace treatment is around one year. However, bracing can be challenging in active young children, and its effectiveness decreases with increasing age and severity of the disease. If bracing fails to achieve correction, surgical intervention, such as osteotomy, should be considered before age 4. Despite the challenges, bracing remains a valuable first-line approach for early-stage infantile Blount disease following Blount disease diagnosis.

Guided Growth (Hemiepiphysiodesis)

Hemiepiphysiodesis, or guided growth, is a surgical technique used to progressively correct angular limb deformities in skeletally immature children. It offers a less invasive alternative to corrective osteotomies, with potential benefits including reduced pain, shorter immobilization, and lower surgical risks. The procedure involves temporarily retarding growth on one side of the physis to allow the other side to catch up, gradually straightening the bone. For genu varum correction in Blount disease, hemiepiphysiodesis typically involves placing implants (staples, pins, or tension band plates) on the lateral epiphysis. This slows or stops growth on the lateral side, allowing the medial side to grow, correcting the varus deformity over time. A key advantage is that growth can resume across the entire physis after hardware removal. Guided growth requires sufficient remaining growth potential, generally at least 4 years. While effective for various angular deformities, results in Blount disease can be less predictable compared to genu varum from other causes, potentially due to the inherent pathology of the medial physis in Blount disease. Screw breakage is a known complication in Blount disease patients undergoing hemiepiphysiodesis, and using two parallel plates or non-cannulated solid screws may be recommended in moderate to severe cases. Guided growth is increasingly considered a viable option for late-onset Blount disease with varus deformity following Blount disease diagnosis.

Osteotomy

Realignment osteotomy is often indicated for pediatric patients with documented and progressive Blount disease, or FDF stage I with risk factors, typically performed before age 4. Due to a high recurrence rate in infantile Blount disease, overcorrection to achieve 5° to 15° of valgus is often planned during osteotomy. The goals of osteotomy include lateral translation, 10° to 15° of lateral derotation, and 5° to 10° of valgus correction. Various osteotomy techniques are employed, including opening and closing wedge osteotomies, dome osteotomies, and inclined osteotomies. Correction can be achieved acutely or gradually using external fixation. Gradual correction allows for more precise correction of mechanical axis and leg length discrepancies. While systematic reviews suggest weak evidence favoring gradual correction, acute correction may be associated with a higher risk of transient peroneal nerve palsy. Reoperation rates do not significantly differ between acute and gradual correction. Acute correction carries risks of peroneal nerve injury and compartment syndrome.

Acute Correction

Acute correction involves immediate correction of the varus deformity and fixation of the distal fragment in translation and external rotation to address internal rotation. Concurrent procedures like physeal bar resection and medial plateau elevation may be performed. Osteotomy should be positioned below the tibial tuberosity to prevent patella baja. Acute correction is considered for children aged 3 and older, regardless of stage, or stage III Blount disease at any age. Intraoperative fluoroscopy can be used to visualize mechanical axis alignment during surgery. The primary advantage of acute correction is immediate deformity correction, but it increases the risk of compartment syndrome and peroneal nerve injury due to acute lengthening.

Gradual Correction

Gradual correction involves osteotomy followed by application of an external fixator (e.g., Taylor Spatial Frame, Ilizarov Ring External Fixator) for progressive deformity correction over 12 to 18 weeks postoperatively. Gradual correction minimizes neurovascular compromise and compartment syndrome risks and allows for multiplanar deformity correction. However, pin site infection is a potential drawback due to the prolonged treatment duration.

Asymmetrical Physeal Distraction

Asymmetrical physeal distraction is a less common procedure involving gradual distraction using half-pins and a monolateral fixator. It can achieve angular correction but carries risks of septic arthritis, discomfort, and premature physeal closure, limiting its widespread use.

Physeal Bar Resection

Physeal bar resection aims to remove bony bridges across the physis to restore normal growth. However, in Blount disease, distinct physeal bars are less common compared to post-traumatic cases. Physeal bar resection combined with valgus osteotomy in children younger than 7 years may improve outcomes. It is less effective in older children, and epiphysiolysis alone has limited utility.

Medial Tibial Plateau Elevation

In severe Blount disease (Langenskiöld stage V or VI) with lateral tibial translation and medial femoral condyle depression, medial tibial plateau elevation may be necessary. This involves an osteotomy to elevate the depressed medial plateau and correct the varus thrust gait. Concurrent lateral proximal tibial and fibular epiphyseodesis is recommended to prevent recurrence of varus thrust.

Differential Diagnosis in Blount Disease Diagnosis

Distinguishing infantile tibia vara from physiological bowing is a key aspect of Blount disease diagnosis. Physiological bowing typically involves a gradual curve of both the tibia and femur, whereas Blount disease presents with acute proximal tibial bowing. An MDA greater than 11° is a critical differentiating factor for Blount disease. Other conditions in the differential diagnosis include:

• Rickets: Rickets can cause bowing of the legs, but unlike Blount disease, it typically presents with symmetrical bowing and generalized metaphyseal changes rather than the asymmetrical beaking seen in Blount disease.
• Ollier Disease: This condition involves multiple enchondromas, which are not present in Blount disease.
• Proximal Tibial Physeal Injury: Trauma, radiation, or infection can cause physeal injury leading to bowing, but these usually have a clear history of the inciting event.
• Osteomyelitis: Bone infection can cause deformity, but it is usually associated with systemic signs of infection and characteristic radiographic findings.
• Metaphyseal Chondrodysplasia: This group of genetic disorders can cause skeletal dysplasia, but they have distinct clinical and radiographic features different from Blount disease.
• Thrombocytopenia Absent Radius (TAR) Syndrome: This rare syndrome involves radial aplasia and may have associated tibial bowing, but it is clinically and genetically distinct from Blount disease.

Prognosis of Blount Disease

The prognosis for Blount disease is largely dependent on the age at Blount disease diagnosis and the severity of the condition at presentation. Infantile Blount disease, when diagnosed and treated early, generally has a favorable prognosis with low recurrence rates. Partial or complete regression can be achieved in early stages with appropriate intervention. However, untreated later-stage infantile Blount disease is likely to progress. Late-onset Blount disease, if left untreated, can also progress to significant joint deformity and pain. Early and accurate Blount disease diagnosis and timely management are critical for optimizing long-term outcomes.

Complications of Blount Disease

Disease Complications

Untreated or poorly managed Blount disease can lead to several complications, including:

• Recurrence of Deformity: Despite treatment, deformity recurrence is possible, particularly in infantile Blount disease.
• Joint Degeneration: Long-term malalignment can lead to premature osteoarthritis and joint pain.
• Limb Length Discrepancy: Unequal leg lengths can develop, causing gait abnormalities and functional limitations.

Operative Complications

Surgical interventions for Blount disease carry potential complications, including:

• Deep Venous Thrombosis (DVT): Risk of blood clot formation, especially after major surgery.
• Vascular Impairment: Damage to blood vessels during surgery, though rare.
• Pathologic Fractures: Fractures through weakened bone, particularly at osteotomy sites.
• Wound Infection: Infection at the surgical site.
• Malalignment: Inadequate correction or overcorrection of the deformity.
• Compartment Syndrome: Increased pressure within muscle compartments, requiring urgent surgical release.
• Premature Physeal Closure: Damage to the growth plate leading to premature cessation of growth.
• Rebound Accelerated Growth: Unpredictable growth spurts after certain procedures.
• Hardware Migration: Movement or displacement of implanted fixation devices.

Enhancing Healthcare Team Outcomes in Blount Disease Diagnosis and Management

Optimal management of Blount disease necessitates a collaborative, interprofessional healthcare team approach. Early Blount disease diagnosis, prompt treatment initiation, and seamless coordination among team members are crucial for improving patient outcomes. Healthcare professionals, including primary care physicians, pediatricians, physical medicine and rehabilitation specialists, pediatric orthopedic surgeons, and radiologists, must work together to ensure timely and accurate diagnoses and comprehensive care. Identifying risk factors like obesity and recognizing key radiological features, such as asymmetrical beaking, are essential for differentiating Blount disease from other conditions like rickets. Effective interprofessional communication is vital for early detection and appropriate management. Nurses and ancillary staff play a critical role in facilitating communication and ensuring patients receive timely and coordinated care. Collaboration with orthotists is essential for providing effective bracing when indicated. By adhering to these principles of teamwork and coordinated care, healthcare teams can significantly enhance outcomes for patients with Blount disease, emphasizing early Blount disease diagnosis, appropriate treatment strategies, and ultimately, better patient-centered care.

Figure

Alt Text: Langenskiöld classification system for Blount disease diagnosis, illustrating the six radiographic stages of progressive physeal involvement and deformity severity.

References

1.Janoyer M. Blount disease. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2019 Feb;105(1S):S111-S121. [PubMed: 29481866]

2.LANGENSKIOLD A. Aspects of the pathology of tibia vara (osteochondrosis deformans tibiae). Ann Chir Gynaecol Fenn. 1955;44(1):58-63. [PubMed: 14388293]

3.Sabharwal S. Blount disease: an update. Orthop Clin North Am. 2015 Jan;46(1):37-47. [PubMed: 25435033]

4.Davids JR, Blackhurst DW, Allen BL. Radiographic evaluation of bowed legs in children. J Pediatr Orthop. 2001 Mar-Apr;21(2):257-63. [PubMed: 11242263]

5.Park BK, Park KB, Kwak YH, Jin S, Kim HW, Park H. A comparative evaluation of tibial metaphyseal-diaphyseal angle changes between physiologic bowing and Blount disease. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Apr;98(17):e15349. [PMC free article: PMC6831111] [PubMed: 31027114]

6.Gill KG, Nemeth BA, Davis KW. Magnetic resonance imaging of the pediatric knee. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2014 Nov;22(4):743-63. [PubMed: 25442031]

7.Erkus S, Turgut A, Kalenderer O. Langenskiöld Classification for Blount Disease: Is It Reliable? Indian J Orthop. 2019 Sep-Oct;53(5):662-664. [PMC free article: PMC6699207] [PubMed: 31488937]

8.Vosoughi F, Nabian MH, Simon AL, Aghaghazvini L, Zargarbashi R, Yekaninejad MS. Langenskiöld classification of tibia vara: a multicenter study on interrater reliability. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2022 Mar 01;31(2):114-119. [PubMed: 33315807]

9.Sabharwal S, Sabharwal S. Treatment of Infantile Blount Disease: An Update. J Pediatr Orthop. 2017 Sep;37 Suppl 2:S26-S31. [PubMed: 28799991]

10.Schroerlucke S, Bertrand S, Clapp J, Bundy J, Gregg FO. Failure of Orthofix eight-Plate for the treatment of Blount disease. J Pediatr Orthop. 2009 Jan-Feb;29(1):57-60. [PubMed: 19098648]

11.Stitgen A, Garrels K, Kobayashi H, Vanderby R, McCarthy JJ, Noonan KJ. Biomechanical comparison between 2 guided-growth constructs. J Pediatr Orthop. 2012 Mar;32(2):206-9. [PubMed: 22327457]

12.Sabharwal S. Blount disease. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009 Jul;91(7):1758-76. [PubMed: 19571101]

13.Griswold B, Gilbert S, Khoury J. Opening Wedge Osteotomy for the Correction of Adolescent Tibia Vara. Iowa Orthop J. 2018;38:141-146. [PMC free article: PMC6047391] [PubMed: 30104937]

14.Feldman DS, Madan SS, Ruchelsman DE, Sala DA, Lehman WB. Accuracy of correction of tibia vara: acute versus gradual correction. J Pediatr Orthop. 2006 Nov-Dec;26(6):794-8. [PubMed: 17065949]

15.Loder RT, Johnston CE. Infantile tibia vara. J Pediatr Orthop. 1987 Nov-Dec;7(6):639-46. [PubMed: 3429646]

16.S DMTS, Taqi M, De Leucio A. StatPearls [Internet]. StatPearls Publishing; Treasure Island (FL): Jan 9, 2024. Blount Disease. [PubMed: 32809758]

17.de Pablos J, Franzreb M. Treatment of adolescent tibia vara by asymmetrical physeal distraction. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993 Jul;75(4):592-6. [PubMed: 8331114]

18.LANGENSKIOELD A, RISKA EB. TIBIA VARA (OSTEOCHONDROSIS DEFORMANS TIBIAE): A SURVEY OF SEVENTY-ONE CASES. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1964 Oct;46:1405-20. [PubMed: 14213402]

19.Andrade N, Johnston CE. Medial epiphysiolysis in severe infantile tibia vara. J Pediatr Orthop. 2006 Sep-Oct;26(5):652-8. [PubMed: 16932107]

20.van Huyssteen AL, Hastings CJ, Olesak M, Hoffman EB. Double-elevating osteotomy for late-presenting infantile Blount’s disease: the importance of concomitant lateral epiphysiodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005 May;87(5):710-5. [PubMed: 15855377]

21.Accadbled F, Laville JM, Harper L. One-step treatment for evolved Blount’s disease: four cases and review of the literature. J Pediatr Orthop. 2003 Nov-Dec;23(6):747-52. [PubMed: 14581778]

22.Bhattacharjee R, Chakraborty PP, Roy A, Biswas SN. Blount’s disease: a rickets mimicker. BMJ Case Rep. 2016 May 13;2016 [PMC free article: PMC4885452] [PubMed: 27177940]

23.Birch JG. Blount disease. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2013 Jul;21(7):408-18. [PubMed: 23818028]

24.Doyle BS, Volk AG, Smith CF. Infantile Blount disease: long-term follow-up of surgically treated patients at skeletal maturity. J Pediatr Orthop. 1996 Jul-Aug;16(4):469-76. [PubMed: 8784699]