Growth rate after limb deformity correction by the Ilizarov method with or without knee joint distraction

Oostenbroek, Hubert J.; Brand, Ronald; Roermund, P.M. van

doi:10.3109/17453670903025345

Cited by 8 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The stimulatory effect when lengthening was performed under optimal conditions was found to reach up to 5% of the final lengthened segment. Some authors have found no change in growth rate in older patients [17,21,24,46], although some authors have found stimulatory effects in young patients despite a higher mean percent lengthening [38]. In our study, using preoperative and postoperative measurements of developmental femoral and overall length discrepancies matched the findings of Popkov et al and others, showing no detrimental effect on femoral growth in young patients who underwent a relative femoral lengthening greater than 23.5% [17,21,45].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Lengthening With External Fixation Is Effective in Congenital Femoral Deficiency

Prince

Herzenberg

Standard

et al. 2015

Clin Orthop Relat Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Treatment of congenital femoral deficiency is a complex, multistage protocol and a variety of strategies have been devised to address joint instability, limb length inequality, and deformities. Despite being an important part of the algorithmic approach to the overall treatment of patients with congenital femoral deficiency, a reproducible, safe, and functional treatment for femoral length discrepancy in patients with mild and moderate congenital femoral deficiency has not been reported. Questions/purposes (1) Does femoral lengthening by means of distraction osteogenesis, using a monolateral external fixator, result in effective lengthening without loss of hip or knee range of motion? (2) Does femoral lengthening cause an inhibition of femoral growth in patients with congenital femoral deficiency? (3) Do patients/families report satisfactory functional and emotional outcomes after undergoing femoral lengthening? (4) (Schaumburg, IL, USA), Pega Medical, and Springer (New York, NY, USA) outside the submitted work. The institution of one or more of the authors (JEH, SCS, DP) has received, during the study period, funding from Smith & Nephew, DePuy Synthes, Orthofix, Biomet, and OrthoPediatrics. One or more of the authors certifies that he (SCS), or a member of his or her immediate family, has received or may receive payments or benefits, during the study period, an amount less than USD 10,000 from Smith & Nephew, an amount less than USD 10,000 from Ellipse Technologies, and an amount less than USD 10,000 from Orthofix. One or more of the authors certifies that he (DP), or a member of his or her immediate family, has received or may receive payments or benefits, during the study period, an amount of USD 100,001 to USD 1,000,000 from Orthofix, Inc during the period of this study. All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 1 editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 1 neither advocates nor endorses the use of any treatment, drug, or device. Readers are encouraged to always seek additional information, including FDA approval status, of any drug or device before clinical use. Each author certifies that his or her institution approved the human protocol for this investigation, that all investigations were conducted in conformity with ethical principles of research, and that informed consent for participation in the study was obtained. 123Clin Orthop Relat Res (2015) 473:3261-3271 DOI 10.1007 Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research ® A Publication of The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons® 1a, 1b, or 2a that had not previously undergone lengthening and had stable hip and knee joints. Of the 32 patients that completed treatment, 30 (94%) were available at a minimum of 2 years (mean, 3 years; range, 2-4.5 years) and were evaluated in this retrospective study. Preoperative and postoperative radiographic analysis, physiotherapy data, patient-based outcomes s...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Lengthening With External Fixation Is Effective in Congenital Femoral Deficiency

Prince

Herzenberg

Standard

et al. 2015

Clin Orthop Relat Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The harmful effects of hyper-pressure on cartilage tissue, impaired vascularisation and shaft ischaemia may account for the subsequent slowdown in growth. Oostenbroek et al recommended bridging the knee in order to obtain a subsequent stimulation in growth [19, 20], but we did not observe any statistically significant modification in residual growth in the knee joint distractions performed. On the other hand, knee distraction avoids joint contracture and dislocation.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 77%

Residual bone growth after lengthening procedures

Journeau

Lascombes

Barbier

et al. 2016

Journal of Children's Orthopaedics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The prognosis of limb length discrepancy is a major subject in paediatric orthopaedic surgery. The strategy depends on the prognosis and must be adapted to each patient. The residual growth of the lengthened segment often remains unknown, but is dependent on age, the percentage of lengthening and other factors. Using a large cohort of 150 children who had undergone bone lengthening procedures, we describe five patterns of post-intervention growth and identify factors that are favourable for normal residual growth. The criteria for bone lengthening which should maintain good residual growth are—bone age at lengthening should be before the pubertal growth spurt; the interval between two lengthening procedures should be over three years; the percentage of lengthening should be <30% of the initial segment; and no more than two lengthening procedures should be carried out during infancy.

show abstract