Extramedullary Motorized Lengthening of the Femur in Young Children.

BACKGROUND: Limb lengthening by distraction osteogenesis is now achievable via motorized intramedullary devices, mitigating many complications of lengthening by external fixation. In young patients, antegrade intramedullary nailing of the femur risks avascular necrosis of the femoral head. A method of extramedullary placement of a motorized expandable intramedullary nail has been employed by the senior author to safely achieve femoral lengthening without the use of an external fixator in young patients. METHODS: Eleven skeletally immature patients with lower limb length discrepancy were reviewed who underwent extramedullary placement of a magnetic, expandable intramedullary nail for lengthening of the femur. Surgical details, lengthening parameters, and complications were reviewed and classified according to the modified Clavien-Dindo Classification. RESULTS: Average lengthening was 32.3 mm (range: 27 to 40 mm) comprising an average 14.8% of femoral segment length. The average lengthening duration was 6.3 weeks, and average full weight-bearing began at 12.6 weeks. All but 1 patient underwent early removal of the device at an average of 4.5 months, and 5 had immediate plating of the femur. Complications rates were comparable to other methods of femoral lengthening, including varus or procurvatum through the regenerate, and unplanned reoperation in 3 of 11 cases. Preoperative considerations included careful planning of implant length due to short femoral segments and protection of the knee joint from contracture or iatrogenic instability. CONCLUSIONS: Extramedullary placement of a magnetic expandable intramedullary lengthening nail can achieve lengthening of the femur without the use of external fixation. Considerations with this technique include careful planning of implant length relative to trochanteric-physeal distance, protection against knee subluxation during lengthening, and mitigating deformity of the regenerate. Off-label, extramedullary use of these devices can be considered to decrease the burdens of external fixation in young children. The technique begs the advent of future all-internal technology specifically designed for safe limb lengthening in this age group. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV-retrospective case series.

Complications of Limb Lengthening With Motorized Intramedullary Nails.

Intramedullary limb lengthening (LL) is now achievable through motorized intramedullary devices. While this technology mitigates some complications of external-fixation-based lengthening, many complications common to all lengthening procedures persist. New challenges and complications exclusive to this newer technology are also presented. The LL surgeon should be aware of and ready to respond to complications involving device malfunctions, poor local bony and soft-tissue biology, patient compliance, neurovascular compromise, joint instability, regenerate problems, and others. While technology will continue to evolve, study of and adherence to foundational principles of LL will minimize risks and optimize patient outcomes.

Lengthening of the Humerus Using a Motorized Lengthening Nail: A Retrospective Comparative Series.

BACKGROUND: Lengthening of the humerus has traditionally been accomplished by the use of external fixation. Intramedullary motorized lengthening nails are now frequently used for lower limb lengthening, and this technology is slowly being adopted for use in the humerus. METHODS: A retrospective, single-surgeon experience of pediatric humeral lengthenings was performed. The time period surveyed included use of external fixation (EF) for lengthening, and the use of a motorized nail (MN) for lengthening. The primary outcome measures were lengthening magnitude achieved, duration of lengthening, frequency and type of complications encountered, or further procedures required, during each lengthening. RESULTS: From 1999 to 2018, 13 humeral lengthenings were performed in 9 patients. Six lengthenings were performed using the MN technique and 7 using the EF technique. The average absolute lengthening achieved was 8.5±1.3 cm in the EF group and 6.6±2.3 cm in the MN group. The duration of lengthening averaged 114 days in the MN group and 103 days in the EF group. The average duration of EF time was 215 days. Two patients underwent an initial EF lengthening of a humerus and then underwent a second lengthening using the MN technique. Two of 6 (33%) MN lengthenings and 3 of 7 (43%) EF lengthenings experienced complications during treatment. Two patients in the MN group underwent planned reversal and redeployment of their motorized nails to attain the planned lengthening magnitude. CONCLUSIONS: Humeral lengthening using motorized intramedullary nails is a safe technique that mitigates some of the complications of EF including pin site infection. It is well tolerated by patients. For lengthenings of a large magnitude, reversal and reuse of MN can be considered.

Syme Amputation: Function, Satisfaction, and Prostheses.

BACKGROUND: Syme amputation (SA) is a term used to describe an amputation at the level of the ankle joint in which the heel pad is preserved. It is performed for a number of indications in a pediatric population. SA is purported to hold the advantage of allowing weight bearing without a prosthesis. A limb length discrepancy (LLD) is useful for ambulation without a prosthesis but can be restrictive with regards to the fitting of modern prostheses. METHODS: A voluntary survey was distributed to persons living with SA. Recruitment occurred through hospital electronic database and electronic advertising. Data collected included baseline demographic information, data pertaining to weight bearing in different environments, as well as 2 validated outcome measures: the Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experience Scales-Revised (TAPES-R activity restriction scale) and the Locomotor Capabilities Index-5 (LCI-5). An illustration was designed to allow participants to classify their LLD by zone in relation to their nonamputated limb. RESULTS: At total of 47 persons living with SA participated. The average age at amputation was 3.7 years (range, 0.5 to 14.1 y), and at survey completion 15.8 years (1.7 to 60.3). Five of the described "zones" of LLD were represented. Average LCI-5 score was 52.6. Mean TAPES-R activity restriction scale was 0.59, the lowest mean being achieved by zone E participants, indicating the least restriction. Ability to walk without a prosthesis was lower in those participants over 11 years, when compared with those under, as well as being dependent on the walking environment. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found no trend indicating that a very low LLD was functionally optimal, and indeed found participants with a moderate LLD (zone E) to have the least mean restriction with regard to their prosthesis. Our study demonstrates that ambulation without a prosthesis depends on the environment (ie, flooring), and rates decrease significantly into adulthood. Optimal care should not focus simply "preserving length," but rather functional optimization and length modulation in parallel with a nuanced understanding of actual daily activities and prosthetic options. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III-retrospective comparative study.

Hip fracture risk factors and the discriminability of hip fracture risk vary by age: a case-control study.

AIMS: To determine the important risk factors for hip fracture and the discriminability of hip fracture risk in different age cohorts (≤80 years, >80 years). METHODS: Consecutive admissions of hip fracture over 24 months in those aged >60 years, and an age- and sex-matched control derived from admissions under a medical unit were prospectively assessed. The risk factors and the discriminabilty of hip fracture risk by age were investigated for each sex in univariate and multivariate models. The area under the curve (AUC) statistics from the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was used to estimate the ability of the independent risk factors to discriminate hip fracture risk. RESULTS: The important risk factors in women aged ≤80 years were lower bodyweight, previous osteoporotic fracture, hip fracture in first-degree relatives and lower plasma 25OHD, and their discriminative effect was (AUC) 0.69. Previous osteoporotic fracture and lower plasma 25OHD were the important risk factors in men aged ≤80 years, with a discriminative effect of 0.83. In the >80-year age cohorts, only falls was independently associated with hip fracture in both sexes, with discriminative effects of 0.60 and 0.62 in females and males, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The overall discrimination of hip fracture risk appears less adequate in those aged >80 years when compared with those aged ≤80 years. Although skeletal factors have a greater risk association with hip fracture in patients aged ≤80 years, it is falls that is important in those aged >80 years. The relative importance of risk factors also appears to vary between the sexes in those aged ≤80 years.

Social media and the medical profession.

Use of social media by doctors and medical students is common and growing. Although professional standards and codes of ethics that govern the behaviour of medical practitioners in Australia and New Zealand do not currently encompass social media, these codes need to evolve, because professional standards continue to apply in this setting. Inappropriate use of social media can result in harm to patients and the profession, including breaches of confidentiality, defamation of colleagues or employers, and violation of doctor-patient boundaries. The professional integrity of doctors and medical students can also be damaged through problematic interprofessional online relationships, and unintended exposure of personal information to the public, employers or universities. Doctors need to exercise extreme care in their use of social media to ensure they maintain professional standards.