Literature DB >> 24604111

Botulinum toxin a does not decrease calf pain or improve ROM during limb lengthening: a randomized trial.

Dong Hoon Lee1, Keun Jung Ryu, Dong Eun Shin, Hyun Woo Kim.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: During lower limb lengthening, distraction-induced muscle pain and surrounding joint contractures are frustrating complications for which few effective treatments are available. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We evaluated Botulinum Toxin Type A (BtX-A) injection in the calf muscles during human tibial distraction osteogenesis. We hypothesized that it may decrease calf pain and increase ROM of the surrounding joints by reducing muscle stiffness.
METHODS: Between April 2010 and January 2011, we evaluated 36 patients undergoing bilateral tibia lengthening who met prespecified inclusion criteria. All patients underwent stature lengthening with lengthening over a nail or lengthening and then nailing. BtX-A (200 IU) was injected at the calf muscle only in one leg for each patient and the same amount of sterile normal saline was injected into the other leg as a control. Selection of the leg receiving the toxin was randomized. Clinical evaluation included a VAS score for calf pain and measurement of ROM of the knees and ankles and calf circumference, with evaluations performed in a double-blinded manner. Side-to-side differences were analyzed until the end of consolidation phase. Minimum followup was 24 months (mean, 30 months; range, 24-39 months). The distraction rate and the final length gain were similar in the treated and control limbs. A priori power analysis suggested that 34 legs were required to achieve statistical significance of 0.05 with 80% of power to detect a 50% difference in treatment effect between treatment and control groups.
RESULTS: There were no differences in calf pain, knee and ankle ROM, and maximal calf circumferences between the two legs at each time point.
CONCLUSIONS: Local injection of 200 IU BtX-A at the human calf muscle does not appear to reduce calf pain or help enhance ROM of the knee and ankle during tibial lengthening. However, the small sample size provided sufficient power to detect only relatively large clinical effects; future, larger trials will be needed to determine whether smaller differences are present. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24604111      PMCID: PMC4397744          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-014-3546-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  26 in total

1.  Muscle regeneration and fiber-type transformation during distraction osteogenesis.

Authors:  P G De Deyne; K Hayatsu; R Meyer; D Paley; J E Herzenberg
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 3.494

2.  Effect of rhythm and level of distraction on muscle structure: an animal study.

Authors:  M R Makarov; L N Kochutina; M L Samchukov; J G Birch; R D Welch
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  The biomechanical effects of limb lengthening and botulinum toxin type A on rabbit tendon.

Authors:  Ronke M Olabisi; Thomas M Best; Christof Hurschler; Ray Vanderby; Kenneth J Noonan
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2010-08-16       Impact factor: 2.712

Review 4.  Clinical application of the tension-stress effect for limb lengthening.

Authors:  G A Ilizarov
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1990-01       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Limb lengthening and then insertion of an intramedullary nail: a case-matched comparison.

Authors:  S Robert Rozbruch; Dawn Kleinman; Austin T Fragomen; Svetlana Ilizarov
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-09-18       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Limb lengthening promotes muscle growth.

Authors:  C S Day; M S Moreland; S S Floyd; J Huard
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 3.494

7.  The response of muscle to leg lengthening.

Authors:  A H Simpson; P E Williams; P Kyberd; G Goldspink; J Kenwright
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1995-07

8.  Effects of botulinum toxin A on functional outcome during distraction osteogenesis.

Authors:  Ronke Olabisi; Thomas M Best; Ray Vanderby; Sarah Petr; Kenneth J Noonan
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 3.494

Review 9.  Evidence for antinociceptive activity of botulinum toxin type A in pain management.

Authors:  K Roger Aoki
Journal:  Headache       Date:  2003 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 5.887

Review 10.  A focused review on the use of botulinum toxins for neuropathic pain.

Authors:  Charles E Argoff
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.442

View more
  3 in total

1.  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

2.  Is there an Increase in Valgus Deviation in Tibial Distraction Using the Lengthening Over Nail Technique?

Authors:  Hoon Park; Keun Jung Ryu; Hyun Woo Kim; Jin Ho Hwang; Joon Woo Han; Dong Hoon Lee
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-01-29       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Efficacy and safety of botulinum toxin type A in distraction osteogenesis of the lower extremities: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Yu-Chi Su; Yao-Hong Guo; Pei-Chun Hsieh; Yu-Ching Lin
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-03-25       Impact factor: 2.362

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.