AI Article Synopsis
- The study compares two methods of limb lengthening: one using an intramedullary nail and the other using the traditional Ilizarov method, focusing on effectiveness and complication rates.
- A total of 31 limbs from 28 patients were studied, with 15 using the nail method and 16 using Ilizarov; the nail group had a significantly shorter external fixation duration (52.2 days vs. 180.4 days).
- While the intramedullary nail method resulted in fewer complications overall, it was associated with a higher risk of serious deep intramedullary infections.
Article Abstract
The aim of this study is to compare lengthening over an intramedullary nail to the conventional Ilizarov method with regard to percentage length increase, external fixation index, consolidation index and incidence of complications. This is a prospective randomized controlled study. Thirty-one limbs in 28 patients were included in the study; 15 were lengthened over an intramedullary nail, and 16 limbs were lengthened conventionally. The mean duration of external fixation in the lengthening over nail group was 52.2 days compared to 180.4 days in the conventional group. There was higher incidence of complications in the conventional method group. In comparison with conventional Ilizarov lengthening, lengthening over an intramedullary nail offers a shorter period of external fixation and fewer complications overall, but there is a high incidence of deep intramedullary infection which is serious.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3732671 | PMC |
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11751-013-0163-x | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!