Distraction osteogenesis in combined sequential use of external fixation and nailing (lengthening and then nailing): An experimental study in rabbits.

Limb lengthening relies on the process of distraction osteogenesis. The active periosteal bone formation has been detected in clinical practice with a lengthening and then nail (LATN) technique but has not been confirmed by experimental studies to date. The aim of this study is to compare the tissue regeneration of the distraction regenerate during tibial lengthening in rabbits using a LATN technique. This study was performed on 54 mature rabbits of the Soviet Chinchilla breed, which were divided into three groups of 18 animals. In group 1 (control), the tibia was lengthened in an external fixator. In group 2, the LATN technique was modeled and in group 3, lengthening over nail (LON) was modeled. The total duration of the experiment was 45 days. On the 10th, 15th, 20th, 30th, and 45th day X-ray, computed tomography and morphological studies were performed. In the experimental groups (2 and 3), a more pronounced periosteal bone formation in the area of regenerate was noted when compared to group 1. In group 2 (LATN), wide cortical plates were formed from the intermediate and periosteal areas. In this group, the maximum densitometric density values were noted. Endosteal bone formation was preserved in all groups. The LON and LATN techniques, when compared with the classical Ilizarov lengthening, do not demonstrate any deficiency in the tissue regeneration of the bone tissue at the regenerate sites. The most powerful bone structures are formed with the sequential use of the external fixation and nailing (LATN).

Knee Joint Bone Defects: Reconstruction With Bone Transport and Arthrodesis.

BACKGROUND: The increasing in primary total knee arthroplasty has led to an increase in infectious complications, revision surgery, and bone loss. Knee joint bone defects (KJBD) may be managed using bone transport and arthrodesis with Ilizarov or bone transport over nail (BTON) techniques. The aim of this study is to compare both techniques in the reconstruction of KJBDs. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of 29 patients with extensive KJBD. All patients underwent reconstruction of the KJBD using bone transport (either Ilizarov or BTON techniques). The primary outcome variables for comparison between the two groups included time in frame (days), external fixation index (EFI, days/cm), residual limb length discrepancy (cm), and complications (Caton classification). RESULTS: Gender and age profiles were comparable. Mean time spent in frame for bone transport was 566 days (σ = 236, 95% CI 429-702) for the Ilizarov cohort and 191 days (σ = 162, 95% CI 101-280) for BTON (P < .0001). EFI for the period of bone transport was 75.1 d/cm (σ = 41.5, 95% CI 51.1- 99.1) for the Ilizarov cohort and 24.7 d/cm (σ = 24.0, 95% CI 11.4-38) for BTON (P = .0004). Union, limb length discrepancy and complication rates were comparable between both groups. CONCLUSION: For the management of KJBD after failed total knee arthroplasty, BTON is preferred due to significantly less time spent in frame, lower EFI, and higher rates of normal mechanical alignment. The Ilizarov method may be useful when there is a contraindication to BTON.

A comparative study of the correction of femoral deformity between the Ilizarov apparatus and Ortho-SUV Frame.

PURPOSES: This study compared the six-axis external fixator Ortho-SUV Frame (OSF) and the Ilizarov apparatus (IA) in femoral deformity correction. Our specific questions were: (1) which of the fixators (OSF or IA) provides shorter period of femoral deformity correction, and (2) which of the fixators (OSF or IA) provides better accuracy of correction. METHODS: We retrospectively analysed 123 cases of femoral deformities (127 femora): 45 (47) treated with OSF (20 male and 27 female) and 78 (80) with IA (53 male and 27 female). The average age in the OSF group was 34.6 (range, 18-66) and in the IA group 35.8 (range, 18-76). All the deformities were categorized according to the number of planes and deformity components as simple, middle and complex deformities. RESULTS: Elimination of simple deformities in the IA group took 58.3 ± 21.4 days, EFI 58.8 ± 39.8 days/cm, and lengthening was 4.6 ± 1.98 cm. Middle deformities were 71.3 ± 26.2, 61.9 ± 30.3 and 4 ± 2, respectively. In complex deformities we had 105.2 ± 21.8, 79.3 ± 35.4 and 3.2 ± 1.45, respectively. Normal alignment was achieved in 55.0% of cases in IA. In 45.0% of cases we had residual deformity. Elimination of simple deformations in the OSF group took 55.3 ± 12.8 days, EFI 47.5 ± 23 days/cm, and lengthening 4.5 ± 1.1 сm. Middle deformities were 43.6 ± 18.9, 59 ± 14.6 and 3.6 ± 2, respectively. In complex deformities we had 44.9 ± 11.5, 57.5 ± 9.4 and 3.6 ± 1.7, respectively. In the OSF group normal alignment was achieved in 85.1%. In 14.9% there was residual deformity. CONCLUSION: Using OSF simplifies deformity correction and reduces its period by 2.3 times in complex deformities and by 1.6 times in middle deformities. Accuracy of correction with OSF was significantly higher than correction with IA.