Bone transport and compression-distraction in the treatment of bone loss of the lower limbs. Injury, Int J Care Injures

Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Policlinico G. B. Rossi, University of Verona, Italy.
Injury (Impact Factor: 2.14). 10/2010; 41(11):1191-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2010.09.030
Source: PubMed


A clinical series of 17 adult patients operated due to significant by bone loss of the long bones of the lower extremity (3 femurs and 11 tibias), is presented. Their management consisted of 6 bone transports (6 tibias) and 11 compression distraction procedures (3 femurs and 8 tibiae) using monolateral external fixators. Bone loss ranged from 3.9 cm to 14.7 cm. Mean healing time was 301 days with a mean healing index of 45.6 days for cm of lengthening achieved. The clinical and radiological results were excellent in 9, good in 6 and fair in 2 patients according to the utilised criteria of assessment. Consolidation was achieved in all but one patient who developed an aseptic stiff non-union. Two patients developed residual limb-length discrepancy less than 1.5 cm, three tibias ended up with less than 5° of valgus deviation. In two cases the half-pins were re-inserted due to early loosening. In two cases reoperation was needed for late bending of the callus after fixator removal. Three cases of bone transport and 1 case of compression distraction needed bone grafting at the docking site. Bone transport and compression-distraction are effective methods for treating bone loss in the lower extremity. It is suggested that the compression-distraction technique is preferable, since this is associated with a lower incidence of complications than bone transport procedures. The deciding factor, however, is the actual extent of the bone loss.

13 Reads
  • Source
    • "Simpson and Kenwright [41] report a fracture rate of 9.4 % in a series of 180 lengthening segments; O’Carrigan [42] reports an 8 % fracture rate in 650 patients with 986 lengthening segments, and Danziger [43] had refracture of the femur in 6 of 18 patients. Lavini [38] had axial deviation in 17.6 % in a series of 17 cases. In our previous study of 100 consecutive cases of bone transport using the Ilizarov method, we found 1 % refracture of the newly formed bone segment of the tibia, 17 % nonunion at the docking site in 10 femurs and 7 tibias, 10 % bone transport arrest due to the failure of distraction osteogenesis in 2 femurs and 8 tibias, and 4 % of cases had recurring infection [22]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A series of cases of reamed intramedullary nailings carried out after complications in regenerated bone and docking site had occurred in bone transport is presented here. Nine patients (femur = 5; tibia = 4) had treatment with resection after open fractures or infection and underwent bone transport. The mean length of regenerated bone was 9.5 cm (range 6-18 cm). After bone transport, the fixator remained in place for a mean period of 12.8 months (range 8-24 months). In six cases (femur 4; tibia 2), the thickness of the cortical wall of the regenerate column was insufficient, and in two of these, there was, in addition, nonunion of the docking site. In the two tibial cases, nailing was carried out shortly after the fixator had been removed and after refracture of the regenerated bone had occurred due to insufficient cortical thickness. In one femur, nailing was carried out for nonunion of the docking site. Follow-up involved clinical and X-ray checks. The mean follow-up was 3.9 years (range 2-6 years). In all cases, union and with complete corticalization of the regenerate column was observed at an average 6 months after nailing (range 4-11 months). Infection occurred in one tibia 4 months after nailing. The infection was treated with antibiotics, and the nail was subsequently removed. We conclude that nailing is a potential solution for regenerated bone and docking site problems but, if used after prolonged periods of external fixation, may necessitate antibiotic therapy for at least 10 days after the fixator has been removed.
    Strategies in Trauma and Limb Reconstruction 07/2014; 9(2). DOI:10.1007/s11751-014-0196-9
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The advent of stem cell-based therapies makes current models of mandibular distraction osteogenesis unwieldy. We thereby designed an isogenic model of distraction osteogenesis whose purpose was to allow for the free transfer of cells and components between rats. As immune response plays a significant role in healing and prevention of infection, an immune-competent mode is desirable rather than an athymic rat/xenograft model. The purposes of this study were as follows: (1) to replicate established models of distraction osteogenesis in a rodent model using an isogenic rat strain, and (2) to characterize the differences between inbred, isogenic rats and outbred rats in mandibular distraction osteogenesis via radiomorphometry and biomechanical response analysis. We demonstrated successful distraction osteogenesis to 5.1 mm in all Lewis (isogenic) rat mandibles as well as all Sprague-Dawley (outbred) rat mandibles, with no significant difference in volume-normalized radiomorphometrics, trending difference in non-volume-normalized radiomorphometrics and significant differences in biomechanical response parameters. We attribute the differences demonstrated to the decreased size of the Lewis rat mandible in comparison to Sprague-Dawley mandibles. We also provide information with caring with the additional needs of the Lewis rat. Given these differences, we find that Lewis rats function as an excellent model for isogenic mandibular distraction osteogenesis, but data procured may not be comparable between isogenic and nonisogenic models.
    The Journal of craniofacial surgery 03/2013; 24(2):540-4. DOI:10.1097/SCS.0b013e3182646c71 · 0.68 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Large bone defects are challenging to reconstruct and require specialized techniques, multiple surgeries, and long treatment periods. When these bone defects are associated with large soft tissue defects, it complications the management further, necessitating soft tissue reconstruction in the form of local or free flaps. We report a case of a 25-year-old male, where a failed bi-Masquelet procedure resulted in a large bone and soft tissue defect of the tibia. Local or free flap reconstruction was not possible due to the extensive scarring and lack of vascular donor vessels. Open bone transport, using distraction histogenesis, was successful in reconstructing both the bone and soft tissue defects.
Show more