Dataset Information

Total hip arthroplasty and femoral nail lengthening for hip dysplasia and limb-length discrepancy.

ABSTRACT: The application of distraction osteogenesis through the use of magnet-operated, remote-controlled intramedullary lengthening continues to provide new opportunities for accurate limb equalization. While limb-length discrepancy and deformity can be addressed by total hip arthroplasty alone, the magnitude of correction is limited by the soft-tissue envelope and complications such as sciatic nerve palsy. This 3-patient case series presents the combination of staged ipsilateral total hip arthroplasty and retrograde intramedullary femoral nail lengthening for the correction of both deformity and limb-length discrepancy. Our results report leg-length equalization, independent ambulation without assistive devices, and excellent bone and functional outcomes without complications, demonstrating that this combined technique can be used to achieve targeted lengthening and deformity correction.

SUBMITTER: Harkin E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6123321 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Total hip arthroplasty and femoral nail lengthening for hip dysplasia and limb-length discrepancy.

Harkin Elizabeth E Rozbruch S Robert SR Liskutin Tomas T Hopkinson William W Bernstein Mitchell M

Arthroplasty today 20180503 3

The application of distraction osteogenesis through the use of magnet-operated, remote-controlled intramedullary lengthening continues to provide new opportunities for accurate limb equalization. While limb-length discrepancy and deformity can be addressed by total hip arthroplasty alone, the magnitude of correction is limited by the soft-tissue envelope and complications such as sciatic nerve palsy. This 3-patient case series presents the combination of staged ipsilateral total hip arthroplasty ...[more]

PMID: 30186905

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLeg-length discrepancy (LLD) after primary THA is not uncommon. Little is known, however, about the role of hip-sparing procedures for equalization of LLD after THA.Questions/purposesThe aim of this study is to report our experiences with these techniques in patients presenting at one institution over a 10-year period.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed records at one institution to find patients who had sought surgical treatment for LLD after THA between January 2007 and August 2017. Patients who had LLD related to conditions other than the THA, such as bone loss or traumatic defects, were excluded. We recorded the time after THA, laterality, and LLD. Assessment of LLD was performed using clinical and radiographic examinations. Patient demographics and true LLD were recorded, as were prior conservative treatment, equalization procedure performed, final leg length after equalization surgery, time to healing, and complications.ResultsAfter exclusion of patients with LLD related to other causes, eight patients in whom conservative treatment had failed and who had undergone hip-sparing leg-length equalization surgery were included in the study. The average age was 44.6 years (range, 18 to 66 years). Seven of the patients were female. The pre-operative mean LLD was 3.1 cm (range 1.5 to 7 cm). In those who were long after THA, ipsilateral (THA-side) shortening of femur with a retrograde intramedullary nail (IMN; n = 1) or with a plate (n = 1) was performed. In those who were short after THA, ipsilateral femur lengthening with retrograde Precice nails (n = 2), ipsilateral tibial lengthening with Precice nails (n = 2), or contralateral femur shortening with a retrograde IMN (n = 2) was performed. The average time to full consolidation or union was 6.6 months (range, 2 to 19 months). Two patients had delayed union. All patients but one were satisfied with final results.ConclusionWe believe that hip-sparing equalization procedures can be part of the treatment algorithm of LLD after THA. These advancements in the field are promising and might expand the indications of lengthening and equalization procedures to include LLD after THA.

Project description:BackgroundBone lengthening with an internal lengthening nail (ILN) avoids the need for external fixation and requires one less surgical procedure than lengthening over a nail (LON). However, LON has been shown to be superior to femoral internal lengthening using a mechanical nail. The magnetic ILN, a remote-controlled and magnet-driven device, may have overcome the weaknesses of earlier internal lengthening technology and may be superior to LON.Questions/purposes(1) Is the magnetic ILN more accurate than LON for femoral lengthening? (2) Does the magnetic ILN demonstrate more precise distraction rate control than LON? (3) Does the magnetic ILN result in faster regenerate site healing, with more robust callus, than LON? (4) Does the magnetic ILN result in fewer complications, including impediments to knee motion, than LON?MethodsWe conducted a retrospective comparison of the records and radiographs of 21 consecutive patients with 22 femoral lengthenings using LONs and 35 consecutive patients with 40 femoral lengthenings using remote-controlled magnetic ILNs. Primary outcomes measured included accuracy, distraction rate precision, time to bony union, final knee range of motion, regenerate quality, and complications. The minimum follow-up times for the LON and ILN cohorts were 13 and 21 months, respectively.ResultsPatients treated with ILN had a lower post-treatment residual limb-length discrepancy (0.3 mm) than those treated with LON (3.6 mm). The rate of distraction was closer to the goal of 1 mm/day and more tightly controlled for the ILN cohort (1 mm/day) than that for the LON group (0.8 mm/day; SD, 0.2). Regenerate quality was not significantly different between the cohorts. Bone healing index for ILN was not statistically significant. Time to union was shorter in the ILN group (3.3 months) than that in the LON group (4.5 months). A lower percentage of patients experienced a complication in the ILN group (18%) than in the LON group (45%). Knee flexion at the end of distraction was greater for ILN patients (105°) than that for LON patients (88.8°), but this difference was no longer observed after 1 year.ConclusionsFemoral lengthening with magnetic ILN was more accurate than with LON. The magnetic ILN comports the additional advantage of greater precision with distraction rate control and fewer complications. Both techniques afford reliable healing and do not significantly affect knee motion at the final follow-up. The magnetic ILN method showed no superiority in regenerate quality and healing rate.

Dataset Information

Total hip arthroplasty and femoral nail lengthening for hip dysplasia and limb-length discrepancy.

Publications

Total hip arthroplasty and femoral nail lengthening for hip dysplasia and limb-length discrepancy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets