We present a retrospective review of a single-surgeon series of 30 consecutive lengthenings in 27 patients with congenital short femur using the Ilizarov technique performed between 1994 and 2005. The mean increase in length was 5.8 cm/18.65% (3.3 to 10.4, 9.7% to 48.8%), with a mean time in the frame of 223 days (75 to 363). By changing from a distal to a proximal osteotomy for lengthening, the mean range of knee movement was significantly increased from 98.1° to 124.2° (p = 0.041) and there was a trend towards a reduced requirement for quadricepsplasty, although this was not statistically significant (p = 0.07). The overall incidence of regenerate deformation or fracture requiring open reduction and internal fixation was similar in the distal and proximal osteotomy groups (56.7% and 53.8%, respectively). However, in the proximal osteotomy group, pre-placement of a Rush nail reduced this rate from 100% without a nail to 0% with a nail (p <
0.001). When comparing a distal osteotomy with a proximal one over a Rush nail for lengthening, there was a significant decrease in fracture rate from 58.8% to 0% (p = 0.043). We recommend that in this group of patients lengthening of the femur with an Ilizarov construct be carried out through a proximal osteotomy over a Rush nail. Lengthening should also be limited to a maximum of 6 cm during one treatment, or 20% of the original length of the femur, in order to reduce the risk of complications.
Femoral lengthening using the Intramedullary Skeletal Kinetic Distractor is a new technique. However, with intramedullary distraction the surgeon has less control over the lengthening process. Therefore, 33 femora lengthened with this device were assessed to evaluate the effect of operative variables under the surgeon’s control on the course of lengthening. The desired lengthening was achieved in 32 of 33 limbs. Problems encountered included difficulty in achieving length in eight femora (24%) and uncontrolled lengthening in seven (21%). Uncontrolled lengthening was more likely if the osteotomy was placed with less than 80 mm of the thick portion of the nail in the distal fragment (p = 0.052), and a failure to lengthen was more likely if there was over 125 mm in the distal fragment (p = 0.008). The latter problem was reduced with over-reaming by 2.5 mm to 3 mm. Previous intramedullary nailing also predisposed to uncontrolled lengthening (p = 0.042), and these patients required less reaming. Using the Intramedullary Skeletal Kinetic Distractor, good outcomes were obtained; problems were minimised by optimising the position of the osteotomy and the amount of over-reaming performed.
Recent recommendations by the National Institute
for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) suggest that all patients undergoing
elective orthopaedic surgery should be assessed for the risk of
venous thromboembolism (VTE). Little is known about the incidence of symptomatic VTE after
elective external fixation. We studied a consecutive series of adult
patients who had undergone elective Ilizarov surgery without routine
pharmacological prophylaxis to establish the incidence of symptomatic
VTE. A review of a prospectively maintained database of consecutive
patients who were treated between October 1998 and February 2011
identified 457 frames in 442 adults whose mean age was 42.6 years
(16.0 to 84.6). There were 425 lower limb and 32 upper limb frames.
The mean duration of treatment was 25.7 weeks (1.6 to 85.3). According to NICE guidelines all the patients had at least one
risk factor for VTE, 246 had two, 172 had three and 31 had four
or more. One patient (0.23%) developed a pulmonary embolus after surgery
and was later found to have an inherited thrombophilia. There were
27 deaths, all unrelated to VTE. The cost of providing VTE prophylaxis according to NICE guidelines
in this group of patients would be £89 493.40 (£195.80 per patient)
even if the cheapest recommended medication was used. The rate of symptomatic VTE after Ilizarov surgery was low despite
using no pharmacological prophylaxis. This study leads us to question
whether NICE guidelines are applicable to these patients. Cite this article:
