Bojan Bukva1, Goran Vrgoč2, Ivan Rakovac3, Siniša Dučić4, Joško Sindik5, Miran Čoklo5, Marin Marinović6, Bore Bakota7. 1. Department of Paediatric Orthopaedic Surgery, University Children's Hospital, Belgrade, Serbia. Electronic address: bojanbukva@yahoo.com. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospital "Sveti Duh", Zagreb, Croatia. 3. Clinic for Orthopaedic Surgery "Lovran", School of Medicine, University of Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia. 4. Department of Paediatric Orthopaedic Surgery, University Children's Hospital, Belgrade, Serbia. 5. Institute for Anthropological Research, Zagreb, Croatia. 6. Department of Surgery, University Hospital Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia. 7. Department of Surgery, General Hospital Karlovac, Karlovac, Croatia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the complications associated with leg lengthening in children treated with the Ilizarov external fixator (IEF) and compare them between two groups of patients: one group was treated using an IEF alone and the other group was treated using an IEF in association with intramedullary alignment (IA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was performed at the University Children's Hospital in Belgrade, Serbia during a fourteen-year period (from 2000 to 2014). Complications occurred in 73 paediatric patients who underwent the leg lengthening procedure. Complications were classified according to the Caton classification and compared between two groups. Group I comprised 39 patients who underwent the limb lengthening procedure using IEF alone. Group II consisted of 34 patients who were treated with the combination of IEF and IA using two Kirschner wires (K-wires) or Titanium Elastic Nails (TEN). The duration of hospital treatment was also compared between the two groups and the impact of the type of IA on the occurrence of complications was assessed. RESULTS: There was a high rate of complications in patients treated using an IEF compared with those treated using the combination of IEF and IA, but there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. There was a statistically significant difference in the duration of initial hospitalisation between the two groups, particularly when comparing TEN usage in IA. A comparison of the group of patients treated using an IEF in association with K-wires and patients treated using IEF and TEN showed there was no statistically significant difference in complication rate and duration of initial hospitalisation. CONCLUSION: IA has multiple advantages as a method of treatment of leg length inequality. The major effect of applying IA in association with a circular IEF is significantly reduced complication rate and duration of initial hospitalisation, particularly when using TEN as a method of IA. This method of treatment also decreases hospital costs.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the complications associated with leg lengthening in children treated with the Ilizarov external fixator (IEF) and compare them between two groups of patients: one group was treated using an IEF alone and the other group was treated using an IEF in association with intramedullary alignment (IA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study was performed at the University Children's Hospital in Belgrade, Serbia during a fourteen-year period (from 2000 to 2014). Complications occurred in 73 paediatric patients who underwent the leg lengthening procedure. Complications were classified according to the Caton classification and compared between two groups. Group I comprised 39 patients who underwent the limb lengthening procedure using IEF alone. Group II consisted of 34 patients who were treated with the combination of IEF and IA using two Kirschner wires (K-wires) or Titanium Elastic Nails (TEN). The duration of hospital treatment was also compared between the two groups and the impact of the type of IA on the occurrence of complications was assessed. RESULTS: There was a high rate of complications in patients treated using an IEF compared with those treated using the combination of IEF and IA, but there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. There was a statistically significant difference in the duration of initial hospitalisation between the two groups, particularly when comparing TEN usage in IA. A comparison of the group of patients treated using an IEF in association with K-wires and patients treated using IEF and TEN showed there was no statistically significant difference in complication rate and duration of initial hospitalisation. CONCLUSION: IA has multiple advantages as a method of treatment of leg length inequality. The major effect of applying IA in association with a circular IEF is significantly reduced complication rate and duration of initial hospitalisation, particularly when using TEN as a method of IA. This method of treatment also decreases hospital costs.
Authors: Alexander V Gubin; Dmitry Y Borzunov; Larisa O Marchenkova; Tatiana A Malkova; Irina L Smirnova Journal: Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr Date: 2016-07-18