Docking site complications analysis of Ilizarov bone transport technique in the treatment of tibial bone defects

Nomogram construction and validation of axial deviation in patients with tibial defects treated with the Ilizarov bone transport technique

INTRODUCTION

The Ilizarov bone transport technique is widely recognised as an effective method for treating large segment bone defects in clinical practice. However, axial deviation is a common complication in the treatment of tibial large segment bone defects, which can have a serious impact on the clinical efficacy of bone transport. Our study aims to construct and validate a nomogram for predicting axial deviation of tibial bone transport.

METHOD

This study retrospectively collected data from 363 patients who underwent the tibial Ilizarov technique for bone transport. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the independent risk factors for axial deviation, which were later used to construct a nomogram. The nomogram was evaluated using the decision curve analysis (DCA), the calibration curve, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC).

RESULTS

Of the 363 patients who underwent Ilizarov tibial bone transport, 31.7% (115/363) experienced axial deviation. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that gender, height, defect site, and external fixation index were important risk factors for axial deviation. The AUC value of the nomogram model was 0.705. The calibration curve and the decision curve analysis showed a good consistency between the actual axial deviation and the predicted probability.

CONCLUSION

The model assigns a quantitative risk score to each variable, which can be used to predict the risk of axial deviation during tibial bone transport.

Critical size bone defects managed with modern techniques of bone transport: An update

Bone transport is one of several techniques that has been proven to be effective in addressing critical bone loss. While it was first described over 100 years ago, modifications to this technique coupled with advances in technology have allowed us to perform bone transport with higher success rates and reduced complication rates. Modern techniques of bone transport aim to shorten the duration of time an external fixator is utilized to reduce its associated complications and burden to patients. We present an update on modern techniques of bone transport for critical size defects and methods to shorten the external fixation time.

A unilateral external fixator combined with bone transport and tibio-talar fusion for the treatment of severe postoperative infection of peri-ankle fractures: retrospective analysis of 32 cases

BACKGROUND

To investigate the clinical effects of a unilateral external fixator combined with bone transport and tibio-talar fusion in the treatment of severe postoperative infection of peri-ankle fractures.

METHODS

The clinical data of 32 patients (22 men and 10 women) with severe postoperative infection of peri-ankle fractures were retrospectively analyzed. Patients' age ranged from 26 to 62 (mean, 42 ± 9.5) years old. The types of fractures were distal tibia fracture (25 cases), distal tibia and fibula fracture (5 cases), and talus fracture (2 cases). All patients underwent treatment with unilateral external fixation combined with bone transport and tibio-talar fusion. 6 patients with severe infection received two-stage treatment involving focal debridement and external fixation, osteotomy, and bone transport. The remaining 26 patients underwent debridement, external fixation, and osteotomy simultaneously. The length of bone transport, total fixation time of the external fixator, and postoperative complications were recorded for all patients. The efficacy of the treatment was assessed using the American Association of Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot score.

RESULTS

Patients were followed up for 16-36 months, with an average follow-up time of 24 months. The length of tibia bone transport ranged from 5 to 15 cm, with a mean length of 8.5 cm. The external fixator was applied for 12-24 months, with an average duration of 16 months. One patient suffered from refracture at tibio-talar fusion site, and one patient had external fixation pin-tract infection. No complications, such as recurrent infections (especially the MRSA infection), poor mineralization, refracture, iatrogenic nerve damage or fusion failure, were found in the remaining patients. The preoperative AOFAS ankle-hindfoot function score was 40.0 ± 3.8 (range, 30-52) points, and it increased to 75.0 ± 3.0 (range, 67-78) points at the last follow-up.

CONCLUSION

A unilateral external fixator combined with bone transport and tibio-talar fusion is an effective method for treating severe postoperative infection of peri-ankle fractures. This approach is capable of reconstructing large bone defects that remain after clearing the infected lesion. Additionally, it provides stability to the ankle, enhances ankle-hindfoot function, and improves the patient's quality of life.