» Articles » PMID: 27527249

Pitfalls in Automatic Limb Lengthening - First Results with an Intramedullary Lengthening Device

Overview
Date 2016 Aug 17
PMID 27527249
Citations 14
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The treatment of leg length discrepancy and deformities has become more common over the last few decades due to newly developed implants. Lengthening using fully implantable intramedullary nails provides many advantages; however, only little data is available. Therefore, we aimed to determine: (1) safety of the implant, (2) the complication rate and (3) functional outcome after magnetic driven intramedullary bone lengthening with a telescopic implant.

Hypotheses: Automatic bone lengthening with intramedullary nails provide good short-term outcome.

Patients And Methods: Ten patients with limb length discrepancy of lower extremity, treated with an Ellipse PRECICE nail, were included in this retrospective follow-up study. The mean limb length discrepancy was 4.7cm (range: 2.5-7.0cm).

Results: In all patients, limb lengthening goals were reached within a range of ±0.5cm after a mean time of 53 days. However, in 2 patients, mechanical failures with unintended shortening were observed. In a further patient nail breakage occurred. Overall, 7 patients presented with complications during the follow-up period.

Discussion: The PRECICE nail represents a new, fully implantable, magnetically driven device for limb lengthening. However, due to a high rate of complications, a close follow-up is necessary to identify early implant failures and to avoid severe adverse outcomes.

Level Of Evidence: Retrospective follow-up study, case series, level IV.

Citing Articles

Total Hip Replacement and Femoral Nail Lengthening for Hip Dysplasia and Limb Length Discrepancy: A Literature Review.

Athanasiou V, Papagiannis S, Antzoulas P, Papathanidis V, Stavropoulos T, Charalampous-Kefalas C Cureus. 2024; 16(7):e64638.

PMID: 39149686 PMC: 11326755. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.64638.


Motorized Internal Limb-Lengthening (MILL) Techniques Are Superior to Alternative Limb-Lengthening Techniques: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Literature.

Sheridan G, Falk D, Fragomen A, Rozbruch S JB JS Open Access. 2023; 5(4).

PMID: 38090621 PMC: 10715769. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.OA.20.00115.


How Much Does Paediatric Femoral Lengthening Cost? A Cost Comparison between Magnetic Lengthening Nails and External Fixators.

Hafez M, Nicolaou N, Offiah A, Obasohan P, Dixon S, Giles S Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr. 2023; 18(1):16-20.

PMID: 38033930 PMC: 10682557. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10080-1573.


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

Mittal A, Allahabadi S, Jayaram R, Nalluri A, Callahan M, Sabharwal S Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr. 2023; 18(1):21-31.

PMID: 38033925 PMC: 10682549. DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10080-1574.


Treatment of Angular Deformity and Limb Length Discrepancy With a Retrograde Femur Magnetic Intramedullary Nail: A Fixator-assisted, Blocking Screw Technique.

Geiger E, Geffner A, Rozbruch S, Fragomen A J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev. 2023; 7(5).

PMID: 37205724 PMC: 10566895. DOI: 10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-23-00053.