| Literature DB >> 27512222 |
Sanjay K Chilbule1, Vivek Dutt1, Vrisha Madhuri1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Stature lengthening in skeletal dysplasia is a contentious issue. Specific guidelines regarding the age and sequence of surgery, methods and extent of lengthening at each stage are not uniform around the world. Despite the need for multiple surgeries, with their attendant complications, parents demanding stature lengthening are not rare, due to the social bias and psychological effects experienced by these patients. This study describes the outcome and complications of extensive stature lengthening performed at our center.Entities:
Keywords: Achondroplasia; Ilizarov; bone lengthening; complications; ilizarov technique; limb reconstruction; short stature; skeletal dysplasia; stature lengthening
Year: 2016 PMID: 27512222 PMCID: PMC4964773 DOI: 10.4103/0019-5413.185604
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Indian J Orthop ISSN: 0019-5413 Impact factor: 1.251
Figure 1Radiographs (a-f) depict the lengthening started at age 5 and completed at age 10. (a) Three ring Ilizarov frame with bifocal corticotomy of tibia. (b) Frame is extended to the feet, and the proximal tibiofibular wire is added after fibula has descended to the appropriate level. (c) Tibia awaiting consolidation. (d) Humerus lengthening of 8 cm is carried out. (e) Finally, lengthening of the femur was carried out. (f) After 9 cm of lengthening at the femur and 20 cm of lengthening in the tibia. Note the medial ankle epiphysiodesis bilaterally to correct ankle valgus at age 11 years
Patient wise details of length achieved for each segment and final height achieved
Distribution of complications encountered during lengthening procedure
Figure 2The heights achieved with (a) both tibial and femoral and (b) tibial lengthening are compared. In (a) by lengthening of 22 cm in tibia and 12 cm in femur between ages of 11 and 16 a final height of 151 cm (between 10th and 25th percentile) was achieved. In (b) by tibial lengthening of 15.5 cm, a final height of 140 cm <3rd percentile of Indian standard was achieved
Figure 3Clinical photographs before and after lengthening of the 11-year-old boy show the change in body proportion after lengthening and its effect on activities of daily living. (a) At 5 years, upper to lower segment ratio of 3.3 exaggerated by the presence of genu varum and hands reach the greater trochanters. (b) At age 11, after femoral and tibial lengthening, the ratio is 1.05, and the lengthened arms reach mid-thigh. (c) Child can sit on a normal chair with feet touching the ground and (d) He is able to board a school bus ed