Biopsy Proven Focal Osteolysis in a Stainless-Steel Limb-Lengthening Device: A Report of Three Cases

Trends and Practices in Limb Lengthening: An 11-year US Database Study

Aim

Over the past couple of decades, limb lengthening has evolved to encompass various implants and techniques. The purpose of this study was to (1) determine trends in the utilisation of various limb lengthening techniques for the femur and tibia in the United States, (2) determine trends in 1-year readmission rate following limb lengthening procedures and (3) to study the relationship of limb lengthening implant used and payment method used with the underlying diagnosis associated with limb shortening.

Materials and methods

Inpatient data were acquired using the Healthcare Cost and Utilisation Project (HCUP) database from 2005 to 2015 from seven states in the United States. Patients with an International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 code for limb lengthening of the femur or tibia were included. A total of 2,563 patients were included. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, and chi-square test was used for comparison of subcategories. Linear regression analysis was used to examine trends over time.

Results

There was a strong linear trend towards increasing proportional use of internal lengthening of the femur from 2011 to 2015 (R2 = 0.99) with an increase of 10.2% per year. A similar trend towards increasing proportional use of internal lengthening of the tibia was seen from 2011 to 2015 (R2 = 0.87) with an increase of 4.9% per year. There was a moderate correlation showing a decrease in readmission rate of 1.07% per year from 2005 to 2015 (R2 = 0.55). Patients with short stature had increased use of internal lengthening and self-payment compared to patients with congenital, post-traumatic or other diagnoses.

Conclusion

There was increasing use of internal lengthening techniques from 2011 to 2015. Patients with short stature had higher use of internal lengthening technique and self-pay for payment method.

Clinical significance

Intramedullary devices have seen increasing use for limb lengthening procedures. Lengthening technique and payment method may differ by underlying diagnosis.

How to cite this article

Mittal A, Allahabadi S, Jayaram R, et al. Trends and Practices in Limb Lengthening: An 11-year US Database Study. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr 2023;18(1):21-31.

Does Focal Osteolysis in a PRECICE Stryde Intramedullary Lengthening Nail Resolve after Explantation?

Concerns surrounding osteolysis near and around the modular junction of a stainless-steel intramedullary lengthening rod prompted a manufacturer recall from the United States market in early 2021. These actions were preceded by similar steps taken in Europe. A concomitant review of stainless-steel lengthenings at our institution demonstrated signs of adverse tissue reaction including periosteal reaction and osteolysis at the modular junction and/or male-sided locking screws. Nearly half of our patients presented with these findings on radiographic images. At the time of the previous review, only half of the nearly 60 implanted stainless-steel devices met a 6-month follow-up. At this juncture, many patients have had their devices explanted. Given the suspected adverse tissue reactions caused by a component of the internal device, we sought to examine the rate of osteolysis post-explantation following removal of a stainless-steel nail. We reviewed a consecutive series of patients who underwent implantation of a stainless-steel limb lengthening device in the femur and/or tibia at a single institution between December 2018 and December 2020. Patients were included if their device was explanted. Periosteal reaction and osteolysis was classified according to a novel and validated classification system, as analyzed by five fellowship-trained surgeons. In addition, changes observed prior to explantation were tracked post-explantation to assess for resolution. The incidence of periosteal reaction and osteolysis prior to explantation was 22/57 (39%) and 15/57 (26%), respectively. Of the 15 patients with osteolysis pre-explantation, 14 patients’ implants were explanted. Of these, eight patients had available follow-up films. Two patients were identified as having partial osteolysis resolution at mean 1-year follow-up, while six patients were identified as having complete osteolysis at mean 18-months follow-up. Periosteal tissue reaction and osteolysis largely resolved following explantation in a subset of patients. These results provide further support to the claim that the stainless-steel device contributed to the changes seen. Further follow-up is warranted to examine the longer-term effects of adverse tissue reaction in this patient population.