Femoral reconstruction using external fixation

Has the Threshold for Epiphysiodesis Versus Lengthening Changed in the Era of Magnetically Controlled Nails?

INTRODUCTION

Limb length discrepancy (LLD) is common in both the pediatric and adult population. Length inequalities can be due to a multitude of etiologies including congenital, developmental, and acquired causes. There has been little consensus on the morbidity of LLD and, as a result, the threshold necessary for treatment of LLD to prevent morbidity. Advances in magnetically controlled lengthening devices achieve greater accuracy and patient satisfaction and create an opportunity to lower the threshold for limb lengthening.

DISCUSSION

Asymptomatic LLD is relatively common in both pediatric and adult populations. Only ~10% of the population has equal leg length. LLD of <5 cm may lead to long-term morbidities such as scoliosis, lower back pain, gait abnormalities, stress on hip or knee joint, and lower extremity symptomatic versus asymptomatic osteoarthritis. The teaching in most orthopaedic textbooks is to adjust the shoe if symptomatic for discrepancies up to 2 cm; consider an orthotic, epiphysiodesis, or skeletal shortening for 2.5 to 5 cm; and possible limb reconstruction for >5 cm. The assumption is that there are no long-term consequences of mild LLD. However, data in recent literature show that small discrepancies may contribute to pathologic changes such as pain, gait abnormalities, and osteoarthritis. Major advances have been made in limb lengthening over the past 40 years. The increased accuracy and superior patient satisfaction of the magnetically controlled lengthening nail versus external fixation methods argue for including lengthening for LLD of <5 cm.

CONCLUSION

If mild LLD can cause long-term pathology, it is important to counsel families on the full range of options for limb equalization no matter the size of the discrepancy. The evolution in technology and understanding of limb lengthening has provided additional safe surgical options. Therefore, the historic treatment protocol for addressing limb differences may need to include lengthening for smaller discrepancies even <2 cm.

Advances in Biodegradable 3D Printed Scaffolds with Carbon-Based Nanomaterials for Bone Regeneration

Bone possesses an inherent capacity to fix itself. However, when a defect larger than a critical size appears, external solutions must be applied. Traditionally, an autograft has been the most used solution in these situations. However, it presents some issues such as donor-site morbidity. In this context, porous biodegradable scaffolds have emerged as an interesting solution. They act as external support for cell growth and degrade when the defect is repaired. For an adequate performance, these scaffolds must meet specific requirements: biocompatibility, interconnected porosity, mechanical properties and biodegradability. To obtain the required porosity, many methods have conventionally been used (e.g., electrospinning, freeze-drying and salt-leaching). However, from the development of additive manufacturing methods a promising solution for this application has been proposed since such methods allow the complete customisation and control of scaffold geometry and porosity. Furthermore, carbon-based nanomaterials present the potential to impart osteoconductivity and antimicrobial properties and reinforce the matrix from a mechanical perspective. These properties make them ideal for use as nanomaterials to improve the properties and performance of scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. This work explores the potential research opportunities and challenges of 3D printed biodegradable composite-based scaffolds containing carbon-based nanomaterials for bone tissue engineering applications.

Outcome of complex non-unions of femoral fractures managed with Ilizarov method of distraction osteogenesis

Objective:

To evaluate the management outcome of complex non-union of femoral fractures with Ilizarov method in terms of bone union, functional results and any complications.

Methods:

This case series study was carried out at the Departments of Orthopedic Surgery, National Institute of Rehabilitation Medicine (NIRM), Islamabad and Civil hospital, Quetta over a period of three and half years, January 1, 2015 to June 30,2018.

Results:

There were 50 patients in the study. There were 48(96%) males and 2(4%) females. The ages ranged between 17-54 years with a mean of 33.58±8.9 years. As per ASAMI criteria, the bone results were excellent in 17(34%), good in 30(60%), fair in 1(2%) and poor in 2(4%) patients. The functional results were excellent in 15(30%), good in 24(48%), fair in 8(16%) and poor in 3(6%). The bone union rate was 98% whereas infection eradication rate was 94%. The most frequent complications were pin tract infection affecting 80% patients, knee stiffness 60% patients and K-wires loosening 20% patients.

Conclusion:

The Ilizarov method provides an effective solution to address the complex non-union of femur fractures. It helps to ensure fracture healing, eradicates infection and provides good functional outcome. The attended complications are mild to moderate and manageable with conservative means.

Treatment of critical-sized bone defects: clinical and tissue engineering perspectives

Critical-sized bone defects are defined as those that will not heal spontaneously within a patient's lifetime. Current treatment options include vascularized bone grafts, distraction osteogenesis, and the induced membrane technique. The induced membrane technique is an increasingly utilized method with favorable results including high rates of union. Tissue engineering holds promise in the treatment of large bone defects due to advancement of stem cell biology, novel biomaterials, and 3D bioprinting. In this review, we provide an overview of the current operative treatment strategies of critical-sized bone defects as well as the current state of tissue engineering for such defects.

Treatment Options for Nonunion With Segmental Bone Defects: Systematic Review and Quantitative Evidence Synthesis

OBJECTIVES

To determine which reconstruction treatment of long bones nonunion with segmental bone defects (SBDs) is effective to restore bone length and union with good function.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed was used to identify published literature on treatment of SBD caused by fracture nonunion regardless of infection between January 1975 and December 2014.

STUDY SELECTION

We included retrospective cohort studies with a minimum sample size of 10 consecutive patients with minimum follow-up of 18 months and available data on radiographic and functional outcomes.

DATA EXTRACTION

Literature review revealed 24 publications with a sample size of 504 patients (395 males, 109 females). Data on bone union and functional outcome and complications were collected and analyzed based on validated classification systems.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Two outcome groups were categorized for bone union and functional outcome, success, and failure. We then performed heterogeneity test to examine the variability or differences in the methods used by these studies and based on that we determined whether the fixed effect or random effect method is appropriate in examining the summary or pool estimate. Pool estimate was examined for bone union and functional outcome in each surgical modality and in each anatomic location when data were available.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of SBD can be challenging. This quantitative evidence synthesis shows that bone union was achieved by different procedures with variable bone union and functional outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

A comparative study of the correction of femoral deformity between the Ilizarov apparatus and Ortho-SUV Frame

PURPOSES

This study compared the six-axis external fixator Ortho-SUV Frame (OSF) and the Ilizarov apparatus (IA) in femoral deformity correction. Our specific questions were: (1) which of the fixators (OSF or IA) provides shorter period of femoral deformity correction, and (2) which of the fixators (OSF or IA) provides better accuracy of correction.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed 123 cases of femoral deformities (127 femora): 45 (47) treated with OSF (20 male and 27 female) and 78 (80) with IA (53 male and 27 female). The average age in the OSF group was 34.6 (range, 18-66) and in the IA group 35.8 (range, 18-76). All the deformities were categorized according to the number of planes and deformity components as simple, middle and complex deformities.

RESULTS

Elimination of simple deformities in the IA group took 58.3 ± 21.4 days, EFI 58.8 ± 39.8 days/cm, and lengthening was 4.6 ± 1.98 cm. Middle deformities were 71.3 ± 26.2, 61.9 ± 30.3 and 4 ± 2, respectively. In complex deformities we had 105.2 ± 21.8, 79.3 ± 35.4 and 3.2 ± 1.45, respectively. Normal alignment was achieved in 55.0% of cases in IA. In 45.0% of cases we had residual deformity. Elimination of simple deformations in the OSF group took 55.3 ± 12.8 days, EFI 47.5 ± 23 days/cm, and lengthening 4.5 ± 1.1 сm. Middle deformities were 43.6 ± 18.9, 59 ± 14.6 and 3.6 ± 2, respectively. In complex deformities we had 44.9 ± 11.5, 57.5 ± 9.4 and 3.6 ± 1.7, respectively. In the OSF group normal alignment was achieved in 85.1%. In 14.9% there was residual deformity.

CONCLUSION

Using OSF simplifies deformity correction and reduces its period by 2.3 times in complex deformities and by 1.6 times in middle deformities. Accuracy of correction with OSF was significantly higher than correction with IA.

WITHDRAWN: Distraction osteogenesis using monolateral external fixator for post-traumatic skeletal defects of the femur

This article has been withdrawn at the request of the author(s) and/or editor. The Publisher apologizes for any inconvenience this may cause. The full Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal can be found at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy.

Femoral lengthening with lengthening over a nail has fewer complications than intramedullary skeletal kinetic distraction

BACKGROUND

Lengthening over a nail and internal lengthening nails have been developed to minimize or eliminate patients' time wearing a frame during femur lengthening. However it is unclear whether either of these two approaches results in faster times to union or fewer complications over the other.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We asked which technique better achieved: (1) the lengthening goals, (2) the distraction rate control, (3) quality of the regenerate bone, (4) fewer complications, and (5) if SF-36 scores and American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Lower Limb Module (AAOS LLM) scores differ in each treatment modality?

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records and radiographs of 11 patients who had 12 Intramedullary Skeletal Kinetic Distractor (ISKD) procedures between 2002 and 2005, and 21 patients with 22 femoral lengthenings performed as lengthening over nail procedures between 2005 and 2009. Details such as leg length discrepancies, operative time, time of removal of the external fixator or ISKD, and any complications encountered were recorded. SF-36 and AAOS LLM scores also were compiled. The minimum followups for the ISKD and the lengthening over nail cohorts were 62 months (average, 76 months; range, 62-93 months) and 13 months (average, 27 months; range, 13-38 months), respectively.

RESULTS

We observed no difference in achieving the lengthening goals between the two procedures. Distraction was not well controlled in the ISKD group; the distraction rates were 1.7 mm per day for the fast group (distraction rate greater than 1 mm/day) and 0.84 mm per day for the slow group (less than 1 mm/day). The lengthening over nail group had an average distraction rate of 0.88 mm per day. One of 20 of the patients who had lengthening over a nail had complications requiring additional unanticipated surgeries whereas six of 12 patients who had femoral lengthening in the ISKD group had such complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on our observations, we believe the lengthening over nail technique for femoral lengthening is associated with fewer complications than the ISKD.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.