Cargando…
Prophylactic titanium elastic nailing (TEN) following femoral lengthening (Lengthening then rodding) with one or two nails reduces the risk for secondary interventions after regenerate fractures: a cohort study in monolateral vs. bilateral lengthening procedures
BACKGROUND: Femoral fracture rates of up to 30% have been reported following lengthening procedures using fixators. “Lengthening then rodding” uses one or two titanium elastic nails (TENs) for prophylactic intramedullary nailing to reduce this complication. The aim of the study was to decide if usag...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4016152/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24156728 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-14-302 |
_version_ | 1782315462556647424 |
---|---|
author | Schiedel, Frank Elsner, Ulrich Gosheger, Georg Vogt, Björn Rödl, Robert |
author_facet | Schiedel, Frank Elsner, Ulrich Gosheger, Georg Vogt, Björn Rödl, Robert |
author_sort | Schiedel, Frank |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Femoral fracture rates of up to 30% have been reported following lengthening procedures using fixators. “Lengthening then rodding” uses one or two titanium elastic nails (TENs) for prophylactic intramedullary nailing to reduce this complication. The aim of the study was to decide if usage of only one TEN is safe or has it a higher risk of getting a fracture? And we asked if there is a difference between patients with monolateral or bilateral lengthening procedures according to their fracture rate? METHODS: One or two TENs were implanted in two groups of patients (monolateral and bilateral) after femoral lengthening procedures. The regenerate quality was classified using the Li system and fractures were categorized using the Simpson and Kenwright classification. The follow-up period was at least 1 year after removal of the frame. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients with 101 femoral lengthening procedures were included in 2007–2011. Group A included 34 patients with bilateral lengthening due to congenital short stature. Group B consisted of 33 patients with congenital disorders with leg length discrepancies. Seven fractures in six patients were seen in group A and five fractures in group B. One patient had residual shortening of 1 cm, and 11 fractures healed without relevant deviation (< 5°) or shortening (< 5 mm). A soft-tissue infection in one patient led to early removal of one TEN. CONCLUSIONS: Fractures occurred in both groups of patients in total in 12 of the 101 cases (12%). The rate of secondary interventions was markedly reduced. Usage of one or two TENs did not influence the fracture rate. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4016152 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-40161522014-05-10 Prophylactic titanium elastic nailing (TEN) following femoral lengthening (Lengthening then rodding) with one or two nails reduces the risk for secondary interventions after regenerate fractures: a cohort study in monolateral vs. bilateral lengthening procedures Schiedel, Frank Elsner, Ulrich Gosheger, Georg Vogt, Björn Rödl, Robert BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: Femoral fracture rates of up to 30% have been reported following lengthening procedures using fixators. “Lengthening then rodding” uses one or two titanium elastic nails (TENs) for prophylactic intramedullary nailing to reduce this complication. The aim of the study was to decide if usage of only one TEN is safe or has it a higher risk of getting a fracture? And we asked if there is a difference between patients with monolateral or bilateral lengthening procedures according to their fracture rate? METHODS: One or two TENs were implanted in two groups of patients (monolateral and bilateral) after femoral lengthening procedures. The regenerate quality was classified using the Li system and fractures were categorized using the Simpson and Kenwright classification. The follow-up period was at least 1 year after removal of the frame. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients with 101 femoral lengthening procedures were included in 2007–2011. Group A included 34 patients with bilateral lengthening due to congenital short stature. Group B consisted of 33 patients with congenital disorders with leg length discrepancies. Seven fractures in six patients were seen in group A and five fractures in group B. One patient had residual shortening of 1 cm, and 11 fractures healed without relevant deviation (< 5°) or shortening (< 5 mm). A soft-tissue infection in one patient led to early removal of one TEN. CONCLUSIONS: Fractures occurred in both groups of patients in total in 12 of the 101 cases (12%). The rate of secondary interventions was markedly reduced. Usage of one or two TENs did not influence the fracture rate. BioMed Central 2013-10-25 /pmc/articles/PMC4016152/ /pubmed/24156728 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-14-302 Text en Copyright © 2013 Schiedel et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Schiedel, Frank Elsner, Ulrich Gosheger, Georg Vogt, Björn Rödl, Robert Prophylactic titanium elastic nailing (TEN) following femoral lengthening (Lengthening then rodding) with one or two nails reduces the risk for secondary interventions after regenerate fractures: a cohort study in monolateral vs. bilateral lengthening procedures |
title | Prophylactic titanium elastic nailing (TEN) following femoral lengthening (Lengthening then rodding) with one or two nails reduces the risk for secondary interventions after regenerate fractures: a cohort study in monolateral vs. bilateral lengthening procedures |
title_full | Prophylactic titanium elastic nailing (TEN) following femoral lengthening (Lengthening then rodding) with one or two nails reduces the risk for secondary interventions after regenerate fractures: a cohort study in monolateral vs. bilateral lengthening procedures |
title_fullStr | Prophylactic titanium elastic nailing (TEN) following femoral lengthening (Lengthening then rodding) with one or two nails reduces the risk for secondary interventions after regenerate fractures: a cohort study in monolateral vs. bilateral lengthening procedures |
title_full_unstemmed | Prophylactic titanium elastic nailing (TEN) following femoral lengthening (Lengthening then rodding) with one or two nails reduces the risk for secondary interventions after regenerate fractures: a cohort study in monolateral vs. bilateral lengthening procedures |
title_short | Prophylactic titanium elastic nailing (TEN) following femoral lengthening (Lengthening then rodding) with one or two nails reduces the risk for secondary interventions after regenerate fractures: a cohort study in monolateral vs. bilateral lengthening procedures |
title_sort | prophylactic titanium elastic nailing (ten) following femoral lengthening (lengthening then rodding) with one or two nails reduces the risk for secondary interventions after regenerate fractures: a cohort study in monolateral vs. bilateral lengthening procedures |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4016152/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24156728 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-14-302 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT schiedelfrank prophylactictitaniumelasticnailingtenfollowingfemorallengtheninglengtheningthenroddingwithoneortwonailsreducestheriskforsecondaryinterventionsafterregeneratefracturesacohortstudyinmonolateralvsbilaterallengtheningprocedures AT elsnerulrich prophylactictitaniumelasticnailingtenfollowingfemorallengtheninglengtheningthenroddingwithoneortwonailsreducestheriskforsecondaryinterventionsafterregeneratefracturesacohortstudyinmonolateralvsbilaterallengtheningprocedures AT goshegergeorg prophylactictitaniumelasticnailingtenfollowingfemorallengtheninglengtheningthenroddingwithoneortwonailsreducestheriskforsecondaryinterventionsafterregeneratefracturesacohortstudyinmonolateralvsbilaterallengtheningprocedures AT vogtbjorn prophylactictitaniumelasticnailingtenfollowingfemorallengtheninglengtheningthenroddingwithoneortwonailsreducestheriskforsecondaryinterventionsafterregeneratefracturesacohortstudyinmonolateralvsbilaterallengtheningprocedures AT rodlrobert prophylactictitaniumelasticnailingtenfollowingfemorallengtheninglengtheningthenroddingwithoneortwonailsreducestheriskforsecondaryinterventionsafterregeneratefracturesacohortstudyinmonolateralvsbilaterallengtheningprocedures |