We compared the complications and outcome of tibial lengthening using the Ilizarov method with and without the use of a supplementary intramedullary nail. In a retrospective case-matched series assembled from 176 patients with tibial lengthening, we matched 52 patients (26 pairs, group A with nail and group B without) according to the following criteria in order of importance: 1) difference in amount of lengthening (± 2 cm); 2) percentage difference in lengthening (± 5%); 3) difference in patient’s age (± seven years); 4) aetiology of the shortening, and 5) level of difficulty in obtaining the correction. The outcome was evaluated using the external fixator index, the healing index and an outcome score according to the criteria of Paley. It was found that some complications were specific to group A or B respectively, but others were common to both groups. The outcome was generally better in lengthenings with a nail, although there was a higher incidence of rectifiable equinus deformity in these patients

We report the results of intramedullary leg lengthening conducted between 2002 and 2009 using the Intramedullary Skeletal Kinetic Distractor in 69 unilateral lengthenings involving 58 femora and 11 tibiae. We identified difficulties that occurred during the treatment and assessed whether they were specifically due to the implant or independent of it. Paley’s classification for evaluating problems, obstacles and complications with external fixators was adopted, and implant-specific difficulties were continuously noted. There were seven failures requiring premature removal of the device, in four due to nail breakage and three for other reasons, and five unsuccessful outcomes after completion of the lengthening. In all, 116 difficulties were noted in 45 patients, with only 24 having problem-free courses. In addition to the difficulties arising from the use of external fixators, there were almost the same number again of implant-specific difficulties. Nevertheless, successful femoral lengthening was achieved in 52 of the 58 patients (90%). However, successful tibial lengthening was only achieved in five of 11 patients (45%)

Internal lengthening devices in the femur lengthen along the anatomical axis, potentially creating lateral shift of the mechanical axis. We aimed to determine whether femoral lengthening along the anatomical axis has an inadvertent effect on lower limb alignment. Isolated femoral lengthening using the Intramedullary Skeletal Kinetic Distractor was performed in 27 femora in 24 patients (mean age 32 years (16 to 57)). Patients who underwent simultaneous realignment procedures or concurrent tibial lengthening, or who developed mal- or nonunion, were excluded. Pre-operative and six-month post-operative radiographs were used to measure lower limb alignment. The mean lengthening achieved was 4.4 cm (1.5 to 8.0). In 26 of 27 limbs, the mechanical axis shifted laterally by a mean of 1.0 mm/cm of lengthening (0 to 3.5). In one femur that was initially in varus, a 3 mm medial shift occurred during a lengthening of 2.2 cm. In a normally aligned limb, intramedullary lengthening along the anatomical axis of the femur results in a lateral shift of the mechanical axis by approximately 1 mm for each 1 cm of lengthening

Aims. Patients undergoing femoral lengthening by external fixation tolerate treatment less well when compared to tibial lengthening. Lengthening of the femur with an intramedullary device may have advantages. Patients and Methods. We reviewed all cases of simple femoral lengthening performed at our unit from 2009 to 2014. Cases of nonunions, concurrent deformities, congenital limb deficiencies and lengthening with an unstable hip were excluded, leaving 33 cases (in 22 patients; 11 patients had bilateral procedures) for review. Healing index, implant tolerance and complications were compared. Results. In 20 cases (15 patients) the Precice lengthening nail was used and in 13 cases (seven patients) the LRS external fixator system. The desired length was achieved in all cases in the Precice group and in 12 of 13 cases in the LRS group. The mean healing index was 31.3 days/cm in the Precice and 47.1 days/cm in the LRS group (p < 0.001). This was associated with an earlier ability to bear full weight without aids in the Precice group. There were more complications with LRS lengthening, including pin site infections and regenerate deformity. Implant tolerance and the patients’ perception of the cosmetic result were better with the Precice treatment. Conclusion. Femoral lengthening with the Precice femoral nail achieved excellent functional results with fewer complications and greater patient satisfaction when compared with the LRS system in our patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1382–8