Reduced lengthening index by use of bifocal osteotomy in the tibia: Comparison of monofocal and bifocal procedures with the Ilizarov external fixator

Kristiansen, Leif Pål; Steen, Harald

doi:10.1080/000164702317281486

Cited by 21 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In group A, the mean external fixation index of 41.9 days/cm is comparable with that of others using a distraction rate of 1 mm/24 hrs, which ranges between 31 days/cm and 52 days/cm. 8,11,[25][26][27][28] In group B, the mean external fixation index of 18.6 days/cm is comparable with that of others using a distraction rate of 1 mm/24 hrs, which ranges from 12.2 days/cm to 19.7 days/cm. 13,15 In October 2001, we started to use callus distraction over an intramedullary nail.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

Reconstruction with callus distraction for nonunion with bone loss and leg shortening caused by suppurative osteomyelitis of the femur

Zhang

Liu

et al. 2007

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present a retrospective study of 27 patients treated by callus distraction using a unilateral external fixator of our own design for nonunion with bone loss and shortening of the femur caused by suppurative osteomyelitis. The unilateral external fixator was used either alone or in combination with an intramedullary nail. The mean age of the patients was 13.6 years (8 to 18). The fixator was used alone in 13 patients and with an intramedullary nail in 14. The bone results at a mean follow-up of 88 months (37 to 144) were excellent in 16 patients and good in 11. The functional results were excellent in 18 patients and good in nine. However, four patients still had draining sinuses at the latest follow-up. A residual deformity greater than 7 degrees was present in seven femora, but this did not adversely affect function or require further treatment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 78%

Reconstruction with callus distraction for nonunion with bone loss and leg shortening caused by suppurative osteomyelitis of the femur

Zhang

Liu

et al. 2007

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The overall average LI in the TSF and IEF groups was significantly different, with values of 4.0 and 1.7 months/cm ( Table 3). The average lengthening was significantly less in the TSF group than in the IEF group, and the LI is known to be increased in smaller lengthenings (Kristiansen and Steen 2002). To our knowledge there has been only 1 report concerning LI in TSF (involving 5 patients) (Sluga et al 2003).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…All patients were operated by two of the authors, with the first author as the first surgeon. The results of these operations were compared with the results of 27 tibial monofocal and monolateral osteotomies in 27 patients (16 females) with the IEF performed during the period 1993-1998 (Kristiansen and Steen 2002).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

No difference in tibial lengthening index by use of Taylor Spatial Frame or Ilizarov external fixator

2006

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Different methods and devices are used to perform lengthening and deformity reconstruction in the tibia. Recently, the Taylor spatial frame (TSF) has been introduced as a computer-assisted and versatile external ring fixator. Lengthening index (LI) and complications are important result parameters, and the aim of this study was to review our first 20 tibial segments operated with the TSF and to compare the results with our experience of using the traditional Ilizarov external fixator (IEF).Patients and methods We lengthened 20 tibial segments in 20 patients with the TSF. The results were compared with those of 27 tibial segments from 27 patients that were lengthened with the IEF. All segments were operated on with monofocal osteotomies.Results In the overlapping zone of comparable lengthening distances between 2.4 and 6.0 cm, the LI of 2.4 and 1.8 months/cm was not significantly different between the TSF and IEF groups, respectively (p = 0.17). This non-significant difference was confirmed after adjustment for age.Interpretation We found no difference between the TSF and IEF frames regarding LI and complication rate. However, rotational, translational, and residual deformity correction is easier to perform with the TSF.

show abstract

“…The bifocal lengthening osteotomy can be used to avoid delayed consolidation in poliomyelitis. Several authors have reported that this procedure reduces HI (Saleh and Jamer 1993, Fischgrund et al1994, Staniski et al 1996, Kristiansen and Steen 2002. Choi et al (1999) suggested this procedure for tibial lengthening beyond 20%, to decrease EFT and to distribute distraction force evenly throughout the entire muscle.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Tibial lengthening and concomitant foot deformity correction in 14 patients with permanent deformity after poliomyelitis

Song

Myrboh

et al. 2005

Acta Orthopaedica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Reduced lengthening index by use of bifocal osteotomy in the tibia: Comparison of monofocal and bifocal procedures with the Ilizarov external fixator

Cited by 21 publications

References 5 publications

Reconstruction with callus distraction for nonunion with bone loss and leg shortening caused by suppurative osteomyelitis of the femur

Reconstruction with callus distraction for nonunion with bone loss and leg shortening caused by suppurative osteomyelitis of the femur

No difference in tibial lengthening index by use of Taylor Spatial Frame or Ilizarov external fixator

Tibial lengthening and concomitant foot deformity correction in 14 patients with permanent deformity after poliomyelitis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About