Comparison between Ponseti's and Kite's clubfoot treatment methods: a meta-analysis.

The objective of our study was to compare both Kite's and Ponseti's methods to evidence which one is the most efficient technique in the treatment of congenital idiopathic clubfoot, based on a meta-analysis of current scientific literature. We performed a search of the past 20 years of literature (1986 to 2006) on MEDLINE, LILACS, and EMBASE databases for clinical trials that compared both Kite's and Ponseti's methods. The search in the literature provided 4 selected papers for the meta-analysis. There was a significant difference between the groups, in which the Ponseti's group was more effective in treating congenital clubfoot, considering both primary correction (P = .001) and uncorrected plus relapsed feet (P = .014). In conclusion, our meta-analysis indicates that Ponseti's group in the clubfoot treatment was superior to Kite's group; however, the available studies have some methodological limitations such as small sample sizes and historical control.