Abstract
The aim of this study was to review our experiences with tibial lengthening over an intramedullary nail in comparison to the conventional Ilizarov method. We performed a retrospective comparison of tibial lengthening using the conventional Ilizarov method (group A: 23 limbs in 13 patients) versus over a nail (group B: 51 limbs in 26 patients). The percentage increase in tibial length, lengthening index, external fixation index, consolidation index and complications were assessed. The mean gain in tibial length was 7.4 cm, which represents a mean increase of 26.0%. There was no difference in lengthening index or consolidation index; however, the patients in group A wore the external fixator longer than those in group B (281.5 versus 129.0 days), which represents a larger external fixation index (40.0 versus 17.4 day/cm). Group A had a higher complication rate (1.0 versus 0.47 per tibia) than group B. Tibial lengthening over an intramedullary nail confers advantages over the conventional Ilizarov method, including shorter time needed for external fixation and lower complication rates.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
