The Ilizarov method of bone lengthening, reconstruction and osteosynthesis has developed immensely since its introduction by G.A. Ilizarov in the Soviet Union in the 1960s and in the Western countries in the early 1980s. It has become an integral part of the arsenal used by the orthopaedic community worldwide. The evolutionary development of the method and its current role has considerably improved the quality of life for millions of people around the whole world. Despite the great versatility of its possible applications for bone injuries and diseases, the Ilizarov method could not and cannot be the alternative to a range of other methods that are applied for some specific bone conditions, but rather is a method of choice. Its combination with the current methods of internal fixation or the means of internal fixation that use the biological principles that were laid down by G.A. Ilizarov have demonstrated the importance of tension stress, blood supply, functional loading, and fragment control during bone treatment. The objective of this study was to present an overview of the current state and concerns in the application of the Ilizarov method and define the prospective research trends aimed at regeneration stimulation, better control of treatment, infection barriers and patient comfort.

Methodological solutions of Prof. G.A. Ilizarov are the core stone of the contemporary bone lengthening and reconstruction surgery. They have been acknowledged in the orthopaedic world as one of the greatest contributions to treating bone pathologies. The Ilizarov method of transosseous compression–distraction osteosynthesis has been widely used for managing bone non-union and defects, bone infection, congenital and posttraumatic limb length discrepancies, hand and foot disorders. The optimal conditions for implementing distraction and compression osteogenesis were proven by numerous experimental studies that Prof. G.A. Ilizarov organized and supervised at a large orthopaedic research institute in Kurgan. The tension stress effect on regeneration and growth of tissues was thoroughly investigated with radiographic, histological and biochemical methods. The impact of the Ilizarov method on the progress of bone lengthening and reconstruction surgery could be called revolutionary.

No abstract

The Ilizarov method is one of the current methods used in bone reconstruction. It originated in the middle of the past century and comprises a number of bone reconstruction techniques executed with a ring external fixator developed by Ilizarov GA. Its main merits are viable new bone formation through distraction osteogenesis, high union rates and functional use of the limb throughout the course of treatment. The study of the phenomenon of distraction osteogenesis induced by tension stress with the Ilizarov apparatus was the impetus for advancement in bone reconstruction surgery. Since then, the original method has been used along with a number of its modifications developed due to emergence of new fixation devices and techniques of their application such as hexapod external fixators and motorized intramedullary lengthening nails. They gave rise to a relatively new orthopedic subspecialty termed “limb lengthening and reconstruction surgery”. Based on a comprehensive literature search, we summarized the recent clinical practice and research in bone reconstruction by the Ilizarov method with a special focus on its modification and recognition by the world orthopedic community. The international influence of the Ilizarov method was reviewed in regard to the origin country of the authors and journal’s rating. The Ilizarov method and other techniques based on distraction osteogenesis have been used in many countries and on all populated continents. It proves its international significance and confirms the greatest contribution of Ilizarov GA to bone reconstruction surgery.

BACKGROUND The Ilizarov bone transport (IBT) and the Masquelet induced membrane technique (IMT) have specific merits and shortcomings, but numerous studies have shown their efficacy in the management of extensive long-bone defects of various etiologies, including congenital deficiencies. Combining their strong benefits seems a promising strategy to enhance bone regeneration and reduce the risk of refractures in the management of post-traumatic and congenital defects and nonunion that failed to respond to other treatments. AIM To combine IBT and IMT for the management of severe tibial defects and pseudarthrosis, and present preliminary results of this technological solution. METHODS Seven adults with post-traumatic tibial defects (subgroup A) and nine children (subgroup B) with congenital pseudarthrosis of the tibia (CPT) were treated with the combination of IMT and IBT after the failure of previous treatments. The mean number of previous surgeries was 2.0 ± 0.2 in subgroup A and 3.3 ± 0.7 in subgroup B. Step 1 included Ilizarov frame placement and spacer introduction into the defect to generate the induced membrane which remained in the interfragmental gap after spacer removal. Step 2 was an osteotomy and bone transport of the fragment through the tunnel in the induced membrane, its compression and docking for consolidation without grafting. The outcomes were retrospectively studied after a mean follow-up of 20.8 ± 2.7 mo in subgroup A and 25.3 ± 2.3 mo in subgroup B. RESULTS The “true defect” after resection was 13.3 ± 1.7% in subgroup A and 31.0 ± 3.0% in subgroup B relative to the contralateral limb. Upon completion of treatment, defects were filled by 75.4 ± 10.6% and 34.6 ± 4.2%, respectively. Total duration of external fixation was 397 ± 9.2 and 270.1 ± 16.3 d, including spacer retention time of 42.4 ± 4.5 and 55.8 ± 6.6 d, in subgroups A and B, respectively. Bone infection was not observed. Postoperative complications were several cases of pin-tract infection and regenerate deformity in both subgroups. Ischemic regeneration was observed in two cases of subgroup B. Complications were corrected during the course of treatment. Bone union was achieved in all patients of subgroup A and in seven patients of subgroup B. One non-united CPT case was further treated with the Ilizarov compression method only and achieved union. After a follow-up period of two to three years, refractures occurred in four cases of united CPT. CONCLUSION The combination of IMT and IBT provides good outcomes in post-traumatic tibial defects after previous treatment failure but external fixation is longer due to spacer retention. Refractures may occur in severe CPT.

Intra-operative microbiological tests at the first-time revision for infected THR detect a reliable spectrum of micro-organisms to assess microbial resistance to antibiotics, develop treatment protocols, and for prognostic purposes. Preventive measures at primary THR and strategies to fight periprosthetic infection and reinfection should be targeted on staphylococci.

Background:Resection arthroplasty or hip arthrodesis after total hip replacement (THR) can be used to salvage the limb in case with deep infection and severe bone loss. The Ilizarov fixator provides stability, axial correction, weight-bearing and good fusion rates.Materials and Methods:We retrospectively assessed the outcomes of 37 patients with severe periprosthetic infection after THR treated between 1999 and 2011. The treatment included implant removal, debridement and a modified Girdestone arthroplasty (29 cases) or hip arthrodesis (seven cases) using the Ilizarov fixator. The Ilizarov fixation continued from 45 to 50 days in the modified arthroplasty group and 90 days in the arthrodesis group. One case was treated using the conventional resection arthroplasty bilaterally.Results:Eighteen months after treatment, infection control was seen in 97.3% cases. Six hips were fused as one patient died in this group. Limb length discrepancy (LLD) averaged 5.5 cm. The Harris hip score ranged from 35 to 92 points. Hip joint motion ranged from 10° to 30° in the modified arthroplasty group. All subjects could walk independently or using support aids. No subluxation or LLD progression was observed.Conclusion:The modified Girdlestone arthroplasty and hip arthrodesis using the Ilizarov apparatus results in sufficient ability for ambulation and good infection control in cases of failed THR associated with severe infection.

Background: Several studies reported on periprosthetic infection after primary THA in HIV-positive patients, but very few showed the results of its revision. Objective: The aim was to compare primary and secondary clinical outcomes after revision arthroplasty for hip joint infection in matched groups of HIV-infected and HIV-negative patients. Methods: Using the hospital database, thirteen HIV-positive patients (13 infected hips) and thirteen HIV-negative patients of the matched control group (13 infected hips) were identified and their records were studied retrospectively. They underwent revision surgery aimed at infection arrest and total hip replacement due to infection developed after primary THA or infected spacers. Harris Hip Score, reinfection rate, limb shortening, and definite outcomes were evaluated with Wilcoxon, Mann-Whitney, and Chi-squared tests. Results and Discussion: Spacers with antibiotics were implanted in patients of both groups at the first step of revision, except one HIV-infected patient who had resection arthroplasty. The mean follow-up was 29.4±2.7 and 33.±2.9 months for the HIV-group and control group, respectively. Three patients of the HIV-group completed two-stage revision arthroplasty versus ten patients from the control group. Re-infection rate was higher in the HIV-group. At final follow-ups, the mean HHS was significantly different (53±3.2 points in the HIV-group versus 79.14±3.1 points in the control group) along with limb length discrepancy (3.71±0.43 versus 1.4±0.32). Conclusion: Both primary and secondary clinical outcomes of revision arthroplasty for hip joint infection in HIV-positive patients were significantly worse than in the matched group of HIV-negative patients. Revisions in HIV-positive group resulted in a higher reinfection rate, a small number of definite two-stage revisions, and lower functional scores.