Literature DB >> 20638660

Leg lengthening using intramedullay skeletal kinetic distractor: results of 57 consecutive applications.

Mohamed Kenawey1, Christian Krettek, Emmanouil Liodakis, Ulrich Wiebking, Stefan Hankemeier.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mechanically activated intramedullary lengthening nails are advantageous over external fixator. However, difficulties with the control of the distraction rate are the main drawbacks, which may in turn cause insufficient bone regenerate. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 57 lengthening procedures were performed using intramedullary skeletal kinetic distractor (ISKD) nail in 53 patients (femoral = 45 and tibial = 12). Average length gain was 4.3 ± 1.6 cm. The cause of shortening was post-traumatic (n = 33), congenital (n = 20), post-tumour resection (n = 1), cosmetic femoral lengthening (n = 2) and post-correction of distal femoral varus deformity (n = 1).
RESULTS: The desired lengthening was achieved in all patients. The mean follow-up period was 23 ± 12 months. The healing index for patients with normal bone healing was 1.2 ± 0.32 months/cm. Complications in femoral lengthening were superficial wound infection (n = 1), premature consolidation (n = 4) and insufficient bone regenerate (n = 11), while in the tibial lengthening, two developed equinus contractures,one had compartment syndrome following implantation of the nail and one insufficient bone regenerate.Furthermore, nine runaway nails and three non-distracting nails were present in the femoral lengthening.One non-distracting nail responded to manipulation under anaesthesia, one required exchange nailing and accidental acute lengthening of 3 cm took place while manipulating the third nail. Patients with femoral lengthening and those with insufficient regenerate had significantly higher distraction rates (P = 0.006 and 0.003, respectively). Six out of the nine runaway nails developed insufficient bone regenerate. In addition,10.7-mm tibial ISKD nails were found to have lower rates of runaway nails compared with other used diameters.
CONCLUSION: We emphasise the rule of distraction rates above 1.5 mm/day in the development of insufficient bone regenerate. Distraction problems with these nails are mostly due to dysfunction within the ratcheting mechanism, which may be related to the diameter of the nail. New designs for mechanically activated nails with a better control mechanism for the distraction rate are required. 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 20638660     DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2010.06.016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Injury        ISSN: 0020-1383            Impact factor:   2.586


  23 in total

1.  Femoral lengthening with lengthening over a nail has fewer complications than intramedullary skeletal kinetic distraction.

Authors:  Shahab Mahboubian; Matthew Seah; Austin T Fragomen; S Robert Rozbruch
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-12-06       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Precision of the PRECICE internal bone lengthening nail.

Authors:  Yatin M Kirane; Austin T Fragomen; S Robert Rozbruch
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 3.  Use of internal lengthening nails in post-traumatic sequelae.

Authors:  Hamza M Alrabai; Martin G Gesheff; Janet D Conway
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2017-04-07       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Is Botulinum Toxin Type A a Valuable Adjunct During Femoral Lengthening? A Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Hoon Park; Soowan Shin; Han Sol Shin; Hyun Woo Kim; Dong Wook Kim; Dong Hoon Lee
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-08-09       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Distraction osteogenesis using a longitudinal corticotomy.

Authors:  Ma'ad F Al-Saati; Robert A Magnussen; Sebastien Lustig; Rodolphe Testa; Gazal Al-Saati; Faisal Al-Saati
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2011-10-28       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  [Progress of remote-control intramedullary lengthening nail and its clinical treatment concept].

Authors:  Fuhuan Chen; H Thaller Peter; Sihe Qin
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2021-12-15

7.  What Factors Correlate With Length of Stay and Readmission After Limb Lengthening Procedures? A Large-database Study.

Authors:  Ashish Mittal; Sachin Allahabadi; Rishab Jayaram; Abhinav Nalluri; Matt Callahan; Sanjeev Sabharwal
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2022-03-30       Impact factor: 4.755

8.  Current concepts of leg lengthening.

Authors:  Carol C Hasler; Andreas H Krieg
Journal:  J Child Orthop       Date:  2012-03-21       Impact factor: 1.548

9.  [Open fractures].

Authors:  Mohamed Omar; Christian Zeckey; Christian Krettek; Tilman Graulich
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2021-07-13       Impact factor: 1.000

Review 10.  [Research progress of intramedullary lengthening nail technology].

Authors:  Jin Zhang; Yonghong Zhang; Chaoqi Wang; Sihe Qin
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2021-05-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.