Introduction: Magnetic internal lengthening nails (MILNs) have been used for humeral lengthening to avoid complications associated with external fixation. Purpose/Questions: We compared the 1-year Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, adjacent joint range of motion (ROM), bone healing index (BHI), length achieved, distraction rate, and complications when lengthening the humerus using MILN vs using external fixation. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 18 patients (22 humeri) from January 2001 to March 2020 divided into 2 groups, the MILN group (7 patients, 7 humeri) and the mono-lateral fixator group (11 patients, 15 humeri). Results: The MILN group showed larger improvement of DASH scores (average 26.8 and 8 for MILN and fixator groups, respectively), less loss of elbow ROM (average 5° and 7° for MILN and fixator groups, respectively), and shorter time to full recovery of elbow ROM (average 39 days and 122 days for MILN and fixator groups, respectively). In the MILN group, there was slower distraction rate (average 0.66 mm/day and 0.86 mm/day for MILN and fixator groups, respectively), less lengthening achieved (average 5.2 cm and 7 cm for MILN and fixator group, respectively), and a lower lengthening percentage (average 19% and 41% for MILN and fixator group, respectively). Bone healing index (BHI) of 0.94 and 0.99 months/cm for the MILN and the fixator groups were similar. Conclusion: Humeral lengthening using the MILN allowed for early full recovery of joint ROM with comparable functional and radiographic outcomes compared with using external fixators.
Introduction: Magnetic internal lengthening nails (MILNs) have been used for humeral lengthening to avoid complications associated with external fixation. Purpose/Questions: We compared the 1-year Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, adjacent joint range of motion (ROM), bone healing index (BHI), length achieved, distraction rate, and complications when lengthening the humerus using MILN vs using external fixation. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 18 patients (22 humeri) from January 2001 to March 2020 divided into 2 groups, the MILN group (7 patients, 7 humeri) and the mono-lateral fixator group (11 patients, 15 humeri). Results: The MILN group showed larger improvement of DASH scores (average 26.8 and 8 for MILN and fixator groups, respectively), less loss of elbow ROM (average 5° and 7° for MILN and fixator groups, respectively), and shorter time to full recovery of elbow ROM (average 39 days and 122 days for MILN and fixator groups, respectively). In the MILN group, there was slower distraction rate (average 0.66 mm/day and 0.86 mm/day for MILN and fixator groups, respectively), less lengthening achieved (average 5.2 cm and 7 cm for MILN and fixator group, respectively), and a lower lengthening percentage (average 19% and 41% for MILN and fixator group, respectively). Bone healing index (BHI) of 0.94 and 0.99 months/cm for the MILN and the fixator groups were similar. Conclusion: Humeral lengthening using the MILN allowed for early full recovery of joint ROM with comparable functional and radiographic outcomes compared with using external fixators.