Clinical evaluation of patients submitted to osteogenic distraction in the lower limb at a university hospital

Abstract

ObjectiveTo evaluate the clinical characteristics from patients submitted to osteogenic distraction to correct bone gap at a university hospital.MethodsRetrospective transversal study, with a convenience sample, from 2000 to 2012, evaluating clinical aspects of patients treated, submitted to osteogenic distraction (bone transport) with Ilizarov's external fixation device. The chi-squared, Fisher's, and Mann–Whitney's U tests were used with a 5% level of significance (p < 0.05).Results33 patients were studied, of whom 28 men (84.8%). The more frequent age was from 21 to 40 years. Most patients were from the metropolitan region of the capital (57.6%). The leg was the most affected limb (75.8%), and the left side was the most affected (66.7%). The most common cause was infected pseudoarthrosis (75.8%). The most common bone transportation type was bifocal (75.8%). Mean previous surgery at others institutions were 2.62 (1.93 standard deviation), and mean surgeries after treatment were 1.89 (1.29 standard deviation). Ilizarov's external fixation device was used for 1.94 years (1.34 mean deviation), from one to six years. The most common complications were pin infection (57.6%), equinus (30.3%), deep infection (24.2%), and shortening (21.2%).ConclusionOsteogenic distraction for bone gaps were more frequent in young adults, men, in the leg, with bifocal transportation, after several previous surgeries, treated for a mean of two years, with many complications (infections were the most common).

Management of Segmental Tibial Bone Defects With a Motorized Intramedullary Bone Transport Nail: A Case Review With Follow-Up

“…[1][2][3][4] The ability to perform bone transport using an allinternal device negates the negative effects of circular ring fixation such as pin tract infection. 5…”

Evaluation of clinical efficacy and safety of the Ilizarov apparatus for external fixation (literature review)

“…Along with the accumulation of experience in the use of the external fixation apparatus, a number of problems were identified such as risks of developing joint contractures, vascular and neurological complications; "ischemic" regenerates; penetration of infectious agents along the structural elements of the external fixation apparatus that pass into the bone [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22].…”