Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 5, Issue 1 | Pages 1 - 10
1 Jan 2016
Burghardt RD Manzotti A Bhave A Paley D Herzenberg JE

Objectives. The purpose of this study was to compare the results and complications of tibial lengthening over an intramedullary nail with treatment using the traditional Ilizarov method. Methods. In this matched case study, 16 adult patients underwent 19 tibial lengthening over nails (LON) procedures. For the matched case group, 17 patients who underwent 19 Ilizarov tibial lengthenings were retrospectively matched to the LON group. Results. The mean external fixation time for the LON group was 2.6 months and for the matched case group was 7.6 months. The mean lengthening amounts for the LON and the matched case groups were 5.2 cm and 4.9 cm, respectively. The radiographic consolidation time in the LON group was 6.6 months and in the matched case group 7.6 months. Using a clinical and radiographic outcome score that was designed for this study, the outcome was determined to be excellent in 17 and good in two patients for the LON group. The outcome was excellent in 14 and good in five patients in the matched case group. The LON group had increased blood loss and increased cost. The LON group had four deep infections; the matched case group did not have any deep infections. Conclusions. The outcomes in the LON group were comparable with the outcomes in the matched case group. The LON group had a shorter external fixation time but experienced increased blood loss, increased cost, and four cases of deep infection. The advantage of reducing external fixation treatment time may outweigh these disadvantages in patients who have a healthy soft-tissue envelope. Cite this article: J. E. Herzenberg. Tibial lengthening over intramedullary nails: A matched case comparison with Ilizarov tibial lengthening. Bone Joint Res 2016;5:1–10. doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.51.2000577


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 6, Issue 6 | Pages 385 - 390
1 Jun 2017
Yang Y Lin S Wang B Gu W Li G

Objectives

Distraction osteogenesis (DO) mobilises bone regenerative potential and avoids the complications of other treatments such as bone graft. The major disadvantage of DO is the length of time required for bone consolidation. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) have been used to promote bone formation with some good results.

Methods

We hereby review the published literature on the use of MSCs in promoting bone consolidation during DO.