Humeral Lengthening with the PRECICE Magnetic Lengthening Nail

Monorail External Fixation in Humeral Lengthening and Deformity Correction with Glenohumeral Reduction: A Case Report

CASE

External fixation has an established use in humeral lengthening and deformity correction. An 11-year-old boy presented with left-sided humeral shortening, proximal varus deformity, and glenohumeral dislocation. Anatomical and functional corrections were achieved through innovative monorail external fixation, including bifocal osteotomies of the surgical neck and diaphysis proximal to the deltoid insertion.

CONCLUSION

Monorail external fixation with bifocal osteotomies of the surgical neck and diaphysis proximal to the deltoid insertion may improve the anatomical and functional outcomes in humeral shortening and proximal varus deformity with glenohumeral dislocation.

An Update on the Intramedullary Implant in Limb Lengthening: A Quinquennial Review Part 2: Extending Surgical Indications and Further Innovation

The use of the intramedullary lengthening nail has gained in popularity over the last decade. The reduction in complications associated with the use of external fixators and excellent patient outcomes has resulted in the largest change in management of limb length discrepancy since the concept of distraction osteogenesis was accepted by the Western world in the 1980s. Success following "simple" limb lengthening has led to surgeons extending the indications for the lengthening nail, including different bone segments, lengthening associated with potential joint instability and lengthening combined with acute deformity correction. There has been a drive for further implant modification to reduce complications, and enable full weight bearing during the lengthening process. This would offer the opportunity to consider simultaneous limb lengthening. The aim of this review is to evaluate the literature published over the last five years and highlight important learning points and technical tips for these expanding indications.

What Are the Risks and Functional Outcomes Associated With Bilateral Humeral Lengthening Using a Monolateral External Fixator in Patients With Achondroplasia?

BACKGROUND

Many patients with achondroplasia experience functional impairments because of rhizomelic upper extremities (proximal limb shortening). Bilateral humeral lengthening may overcome these functional limitations, but it is associated with several risks, such as radial nerve palsy and insufficient bone regeneration. Only a few studies have reported on patient satisfaction and functional outcome after humeral lengthening in patients with achondroplasia. Furthermore, the reported numbers of adverse events associated with lengthening procedures using external fixators vary widely.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Does bilateral humeral lengthening with a monolateral external fixator in patients with achondroplasia reliably improve patient function and autonomy, and what proportion of patients achieved at least 8 cm of humeral lengthening? (2) What adverse events occur after bilateral humeral lengthening with monolateral external fixators?

METHODS

Between 2011 and 2019, 44 patients underwent humeral lengthening at our institution. Humeral lengthening was performed in patients with severe shortening of the upper extremities and functional impairments. In humeri in which intramedullary devices were not applicable, lengthening was performed with monolateral external fixators in 40 patients. Eight patients were excluded because they underwent unilateral lengthening for etiologies other than achondroplasia, and another four patients did not fulfill the minimum study follow-up period of 2 years, leaving 28 patients with bilateral humeral lengthening to treat achondroplasia available for analysis in this retrospective study. The patients had a median (interquartile range) age of 8 years (8 to 10), and 50% (14 of 28) were girls. The median follow-up time was 6 years (4 to 8). The median humeral lengthening was 9 cm (9 to 10) with a median elongation of 73% (67% to 78%) from an initial median length of 12 cm (11 to 13). To determine whether this treatment reliably improved patient function and autonomy, surgeons retrospectively evaluated patient charts. An unvalidated retrospective patient-reported outcome measure questionnaire consisting of nine items (with answers of "yes" or "no" or a 5-point Likert scale) was administered to assess the patient's functional improvement in activities of daily living, physical appearance, and overall satisfaction, such that 45 points was the highest possible score. The radiographic outcome was assessed on calibrated radiographs of the humerus. To ascertain the proportion of adverse events, study surgeons performed a chart review and telephone interviews. Major complications were defined as events that resulted in unplanned revision surgery, nerve injury (either temporary or permanent), refracture of the bone regenerate, or permanent functional sequelae. Minor complications were characterized as events that resolved without further surgical interventions.

RESULTS

On our unvalidated assessment of patient function and independence, all patients reported improvement at their most recent follow-up compared with scores obtained before treatment (median [IQR] 24 [16 to 28] before surgery versus 44 [42 to 45] at latest follow-up, difference of medians 20 points, p < 0.001). A total of 89% (25 of 28) of patients achieved the desired 8 cm of lengthening in both arms. A total of 50% (14 of 28) of our patients experienced a major complication. Specifically, 39% (11 of 28) had an unplanned reoperation, 39% (11 of 28) had a radial nerve palsy, 18% (5 of 28) had a refracture of the regenerate, and 4% (1 of 28) concluded treatment with a severe limb length discrepancy. In addition, 82% (23 of 28) of our patients experienced minor complications that resolved without further surgery and did not involve radial nerve symptoms. Radial nerve palsy was observed immediately postoperatively in eight of 13 segments, and 1 to 7 days postoperatively in five of 13 segments. The treatment goal was not achieved because of radial nerve palsy in 5% (3 of 56) of lengthened segments, which occurred in 7% (2 of 28) of patients. Full functional recovery of the radial nerve was observed in all patients after a median (IQR) of 3 months (2 to 5). Refractures of bone regenerates were observed in 11% (6 of 56) of humeri in 18% (5 of 28) of patients. Of those refractures, 1 of 6 patients was treated nonsurgically with a hanging cast, while 5 of 6 patients underwent revision surgery with intramedullary rodding.

CONCLUSION

Most patients with achondroplasia who underwent humeral lengthening achieved the treatment goal without permanent sequelae; nonetheless, complications of treatment were common, and the road to recovery was long and often complicated, with many patients experiencing problems that were either painful (such as refracture) or bothersome (such as temporary radial nerve palsy). However, using a subjective scale, patients seemed improved after treatment; nevertheless, robust outcomes tools are not available for this condition, and so we must interpret that finding with caution. Considering our discoveries, bilateral humeral lengthening with a monolateral external fixator should only be considered in patients with severe functional impairments because of rhizomelic shortening of the upper extremities. If feasible, internal lengthening devices might be preferable, as these are generally associated with higher patient comfort and decreased complication rates compared with external fixators.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

Humerus Lengthening with a Motorized Intramedullary Nail: A Systematic Review of Outcomes and Complications

Aim

In the past decade, internal limb lengthening nails have gained popularity. In this study, we aim to systematically review the literature on humerus limb lengthening with a motorized intramedullary nail (MIN). We intend to assess the outcome and complications of this technique.

Materials and methods

A systematic review was performed in the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Journal of Limb Lengthening and Reconstruction. The inclusion criteria included limb lengthening of the humerus using an intramedullary nail, clinical studies, all levels of evidence, and no restriction to the date of publication.

Results

Our search yielded 239 journal articles. A total of nine articles remained relevant based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The total number of patients was 20, with 22 segments lengthened. The mean age of the patients was 20.8-year-old [standard deviation (SD), 12.0; range, 13-51]. The mean gained length was 5.7 cm (SD, 0.9; range, 5-7.5) with a mean distraction protocol of 0.82 mm/day (SD, 0.2; range, 0.6-1). The average duration of lengthening was 71.6 days (SD, 12.8; range, 50-93), and the mean duration of consolidation was 192.3 days (SD, 40.5; range, 120-228). Reported complications included a range of motion (ROM) limitation, hardware failure, and hypertrophic bone regeneration.

Conclusion

Humeral lengthening with an MIN provides favourable outcomes with low complication rates. Future high-level studies should focus on comparing long-term outcomes of humeral lengthening utilising internal and external fixation techniques.

Clinical significance

Humeral lengthening using MIN can be used safely. Each surgical approach and type of nail have different risks and benefits. These should be carefully discussed when planning the surgery.

How to cite this article

Lorange JP, Alamiri N, Marwan Y, et al. Humerus Lengthening with a Motorized Intramedullary Nail: A Systematic Review of Outcomes and Complications. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr 2022;17(3):165-171.

Technical Considerations and Early Results of Magnetic Compressive Intramedullary Nailing for Humeral Shaft Delayed Unions and Nonunions

Background

Expandable magnetic rods and intramedullary nails are being used in a number of innovative ways, including limb length discrepancy and scoliosis correction. However, recently, the full complement of these devices has been further explored, with the utilization of their compressive capacity to improve fracture healing. The purpose of the present study was to report on early results of compressive magnetic intramedullary nailing for humeral shaft delayed unions and nonunions.

Methods

This retrospective case series was completed at a level 1 trauma center, with adult patients who underwent compressive intramedullary nailing from 2017 to 2021 for humeral shaft nonunion or delayed union. The primary indication for this procedure was nonunion in the setting of previous conventional fixation, but a subset of patients with atrophic nonunions and risk factors for recalcitrant nonunion were also included.

Results

Fourteen patients, with a mean age of 51 ± 17 years, underwent compressive magnetic intramedullary nailing. Nine patients had previously underwent surgery, 6 of which had undergone multiple prior procedures. Five others were initially treated nonoperatively and underwent surgery 4.1 ± 2.9 months out from injury. Ten patients went on to union at a mean of 2.9 ± 2.4 months. One patient experienced hardware failure with nail cut-out at 2 weeks, and one required revision surgery for a wound infection. Three other patients were lost to follow-up, one of which was deceased for reasons unrelated to surgery.

Conclusion

Compressive magnetic intramedullary nails are a viable solution for complex humeral shaft nonunions, particularly in the setting of previously well-fixed fractures and those at risk of recalcitrant nonunion. However, comparative and prospective studies looking at union rates and secondary procedures are needed to more clearly define their role in treatment and assure their safety, given recent concerns regarding osteolysis at the nail modular junction.

Femoral lengthening in young patients: An evidence-based comparison between motorized lengthening nails and external fixation

BACKGROUND

Femoral lengthening is a procedure of great importance in the treatment of congenital and acquired limb deficiencies. Technological advances have led to the latest designs of fully implantable motorized intramedullary lengthening nails. The use of these nails has increased over the last few years.

AIM

To review and critically appraise the literature comparing the outcome of femoral lengthening in children using intramedullary motorized lengthening nails to external fixation.

METHODS

Electronic databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane) were systematically searched in November 2019 for studies comparing the outcome of femoral lengthening in children using magnetic lengthening nails and external fixation. The outcomes included amount of gained length, healing index, complications and patient reported outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 452 identified studies, only two (retrospective and non-randomized) met the inclusion criteria. A total of 91 femora were included. In both studies, the age of patients treated with nails ranged from 15 to 21 years compared to 9 to 15 years for patients in the external fixation group. Both devices achieved the target length. Prevalence of adverse events was less in the nail (60%-73%) than in the external fixation (81%-100%) group. None of the studies presented patient reported outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The clinical effectiveness of motorized nails is equivalent or superior to external fixation for femoral lengthening in young patients. The available literature is limited and does not provide evidence on patient quality of life or cost effectiveness of the interventions.

Intramedullary Antibiotic Depot Does Not Preclude Successful Intramedullary Lengthening or Compression

SUMMARY

The challenging problem of long bone infection and limb length difference cannot be addressed using only an antibiotic-coated nonmagnetic static nail. The combined use of resorbable calcium sulfate and magnetic lengthening nails offers a possible solution to this dilemma, as well as for infected nonunions that require compression. We present a combined technique to treat or prevent infection using femoral or tibial intramedullary antibiotic delivery with an absorbable calcium sulfate depot and concomitant internal lengthening or compression using a nail. Adequate débridement is required in cases of established infection and is a prerequisite for this technique.

Humerus Lengthening: A Comparison of the Internal Lengthening Nail to External Fixation

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.

Upper Limb Lengthening in Achondroplasia Using Unilateral External Fixation

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to analyze the long-term results of humeral lengthening in achondroplastic patients and make suggestions on the most appropriate surgical technique to improve patient outcomes.

METHODS

Fifty-four humeral lengthening procedures performed in 27 achondroplastic patients were reviewed. Elongations were performed by means of callotasis with unilateral external fixation. Inclusion criteria were: achondroplastic patients under 17 years without prior arm operations and minimum follow-up of 36 months.

RESULTS

Fifty humeri in 25 patients (13 men and 12 women), aged between 9 and 17 years, met the inclusion criteria. Mean humeral lengthening was 8.82 cm (range: 5 to 10.5 cm), which represented an elongation of 54.80% (range: 46% to 63%) of the original length. The healing index was 0.91 months (range: 0.72 to 1.4 mo) per centimeter gained. Shoulder and elbow range of motion and stability were preserved in 47 limbs. Noncomplicated cases consistently experienced a significant functional improvement in the performance of activities of daily living such as putting on footwear and personal hygiene. Short-term complications included 11 pin-tract infections, 1 radial nerve neuropraxia, and 1 failure of the regenerated bone formation. None of these complications prevented from completion of treatment. Long-term complications included 2 cases of nonunion, 3 elbow flexion contractures, and 2 cases of psychological dissatisfaction, all of them in 4 patients. Factors associated with long-term complications were intraoperative fragment displacement and distal humeral osteotomy. No fractures of the regenerated bone were identified in the long term.

CONCLUSIONS

Callotasis with unilateral external fixation is a reliable and well-tolerated procedure for humeral lengthening in achondroplastic patients, with an acceptable complication rate. Guided fixator placement and a proximal humeral osteotomy are strongly recommended technical tips as they may help prevent complications and improve outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV-case series.

Limb Length Discrepancy and Angular Deformity due to Benign Bone Tumors and Tumor-like Lesions

Benign bone tumors and tumor-like lesions are frequently diagnosed in children and adolescents. The immature skeleton is at risk for growth disturbances and deformity because of the effects of the lesions on normal bone architecture and the physis. The development, manifestation, and severity of the limb length inequality and deformity differs between the various bone pathologies. Distraction osteogenesis, osteotomy, and guided growth are key tools in the treatment of limb inequality and deformity using a combination of external and internal fixation devices.

Early outcomes of magnetic intramedullary compression nailing for humeral fractures

PURPOSE

The optimal treatment protocol for humeral shaft fractures at risk for nonunions is controversial. Here, we aim to describe magnetic intramedullary compression nailing as an option for these challenging scenarios and to evaluate its clinical and radiographic outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective case series was performed at an urban university-based level-1 trauma center. Patients aged 18-65 who underwent fixation of their at-risk humerus shaft fracture using the PRECICE nail were included in this investigation. These fractures are characterized by a persistent distraction gap, minimal callous formation, or malalignment greater than 20 degrees. The study data were collected through a retrospective chart review and review of the radiographic studies. Primary outcome measure was radiographic union. Secondary outcome measures included mechanical failure, nonunion, malunion, medical, and surgical complications. Functional outcome was determined by range of motion and restoration of rotator cuff strength.

RESULTS

A total of six patients were included who underwent treatment of their humeral shaft fracture with a NuVasive PRECICE nail after failure of conservative management. After nail placement along with our compression protocol, all patients achieved bony union and experienced favorable outcomes with return to their previous working status. Two complications included a superficial incisional infection treated with antibiotics and a backing out of proximal screw which did not cause discomfort. No other mechanical failures, surgical complications, or medical complications occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Early results of controlled compression nailing for humeral shaft fracture demonstrated favorable clinical outcomes. This technique may be utilized for these challenging situations.

Anatomical Considerations of Intramedullary Humeral Nailing and Lengthening

Intramedullary lengthening, in cases of extensive humeral shortening, offers the advantages of preventing external-fixator-associated problems. The humeral cavity, as the main parameter in nailing, however, has been neglected in recent literature. It was hypothesized that available implants might be too large and therefore increase the risk of intraoperative fractures. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to describe the humeral canal and how it might affect the choice of implant and the surgical approach. Thirty humeri (15 female, 15 male) from clinical patients and anatomical specimens were studied. Specifically, the medullary cavity width (MCW), cortical thickness (CoT), and the course of the medullary canal were examined. The smallest MCW diameters were found at the distal third of the humeral shaft with mean diameters of 10.15 ± 1.96 mm. CoTs of female humeri were significantly smaller than those of male humeri (p < 0.001). The mean angles of the pro- and recurvatum were 4.01 ± 1.68° and 10.03 ± 2.25°, and the mean valgus bending was 3.37 ± 1.58°. Before implanting a straight lengthening nail into a doubly curved humerus, X-rays and, in selected cases, CT-scans should be performed. The unique size and course of the humeral canal favors an antegrade approach in cases of intramedullary lengthening.

Limb lengthening history, evolution, complications and current concepts

Limb lengthening continues to be a real challenge to both the patient and the orthopaedic surgeon. Although it is not a difficult operative problem, there is a long and exhausting postoperative commitment which can jeopardize early good results. I aim to review the history, evolution, biology, complications and current concepts of limb lengthening. Ilizarov's innovative procedure using distraction histeogenesis is the mainstay of all newly developing methods of treatment. The method of fixation is evolving rapidly from unilateral external fixator to ring fixator, computer assisted and finally lengthening intramedullary nails. The newly manufactured nails avoid many of the drawbacks of external fixation but they have their own complications. In general, the indications for limb lengthening are controversial. The indications have been extended from lower limb length inequality to upper extremity lengthening, including humeral, forearm and phalangeal lengthening. A wide range in frequency of complications is recorded in the English literature, which may reach up to 100% of cases treated. With developing experience, cosmetic lengthening has become possible using external or internal lengthening devices with an acceptable rate of problems.Level of evidence: V.

Innovative Technique in Extended Intramedullary Humeral Lengthening: A Case Report

CASE

Intramedullary humeral lengthening is still a very uncommon procedure to treat humeral limb length discrepancy (LLD). This approach has various advantages compared with external devices but is limited in its ability to lengthen bones because of the length of the telescopic nail. This case report describes a middle-aged patient with a short right humerus secondary to a childhood growth plate injury that was successfully lengthened with an off-label application of a tibial distracting device. Hereby, a novel treatment technique with unlocking, backwinding, and reinterlocking of the telescopic nail for extended humeral distraction was performed.

CONCLUSIONS

Extended intramedullary humeral lengthening with unlocking, backwinding, and reinterlocking of the nail is a cost-effective, minimally invasive procedure in cases of massive humeral LLD with limitations in the distraction capacity of the telescopic nail.