• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

儿童股骨延长术:机动髓内钉与外固定技术的比较。

Femoral Lengthening in Children: A Comparison of Motorized Intramedullary Nailing Versus External Fixation Techniques.

机构信息

Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

J Pediatr Orthop. 2022;42(5):253-259. doi: 10.1097/BPO.0000000000002120.

DOI:10.1097/BPO.0000000000002120
PMID:35180729
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Femoral lengthening is associated with high complication rates often related to the type of surgical device used to perform the lengthening. The advent of intramedullary lengthening devices has promised a reduction in complications when compared with external fixation systems. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of femoral lengthening in children using a motorized intramedullary nail (Precice) versus an external fixation system (Taylor Spatial Frame-TSF; or Monolateral Rail System-MRS) at a single institution, single surgeon practice.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective comparison of pediatric patients who had previously undergone femoral lengthening (±deformity correction). Patients ages 8 to 18 years of age were included and grouped based on whether they had undergone Precice nailing or external fixation (TSF or MRS) between 2010 and 2019.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients (32 femurs) were included. Thirteen patients (15 femurs) had undergone Precice nailing and 14 patients (17 femurs) had undergone external fixation. The Precice group had significantly fewer problems, obstacles, and complications than the external fixation group, Precice 6.6%, 0%, 0%, respectively, and external fixation 47.1%, 29.4%, 0% respectively (P<0.01). Unplanned return to the operating room occurred in 4 cases, solely in the external fixation group. There were no differences in percentage of goal length achieved, Precice (mean 93.6%, range: 66.7% to 114.3%), external fixation (mean 96%, range: 76.9% to 117.5%) P=0.31 and total length achieved, Precice (mean: 44 mm, range: 20 to 80 mm), external fixation (mean: 46 mm, range: 10 to 70 mm) P=0.72. There was no difference in consolidation index, Precice (24.1 d/cm), external fixation (28.5 d/cm) P=0.36. The Precice group had a significantly shorter length of stay (mean: 2.2 d, range: 1 to 4 d), compared with the external fixation group (mean: 3.7 d, range: 2 to 8), P=0.01.

CONCLUSIONS

Femoral lengthening in children using a motorized intramedullary nail was associated with a markedly reduced rate of complications and shorter length of stay compared with external fixation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

摘要

背景

股骨延长术与高并发症发生率相关,且常与用于进行延长术的手术器械类型有关。髓内延长器械的出现承诺与外固定系统相比可降低并发症发生率。本研究的目的是在单机构、单外科医生实践中比较使用动力髓内钉(Precice)与外固定系统(Taylor 空间框架-TSF;或单侧轨道系统-MRS)进行儿童股骨延长的临床结果。

方法

这是一项回顾性比较研究,纳入了此前接受过股骨延长术(+畸形矫正)的儿科患者。纳入年龄为 8 至 18 岁的患者,并根据他们在 2010 年至 2019 年间是否接受过 Precice 钉钉或外固定(TSF 或 MRS)进行分组。

结果

共纳入 27 例患者(32 条股骨)。13 例患者(15 条股骨)接受了 Precice 钉钉治疗,14 例患者(17 条股骨)接受了外固定治疗。与外固定组相比,Precice 组的问题、障碍和并发症明显更少,分别为 Precice 组 6.6%、0%、0%,而外固定组为 47.1%、29.4%、0%(P<0.01)。仅在外固定组中,有 4 例患者出现了计划外再次返回手术室的情况。目标长度达成率无差异,Precice 组(平均 93.6%,范围:66.7%至 114.3%),外固定组(平均 96%,范围:76.9%至 117.5%),P=0.31;总长度达成率也无差异,Precice 组(平均:44mm,范围:20 至 80mm),外固定组(平均:46mm,范围:10 至 70mm),P=0.72。骨痂指数也无差异,Precice 组(24.1d/cm),外固定组(28.5d/cm),P=0.36。与外固定组相比,使用动力髓内钉的 Precice 组的住院时间明显缩短(平均:2.2d,范围:1 至 4d),外固定组(平均:3.7d,范围:2 至 8d),P=0.01。

结论

与外固定相比,儿童使用动力髓内钉进行股骨延长术与并发症发生率显著降低和住院时间缩短相关。

证据水平

III 级。

相似文献

1
Femoral Lengthening in Children: A Comparison of Motorized Intramedullary Nailing Versus External Fixation Techniques.儿童股骨延长术:机动髓内钉与外固定技术的比较。
J Pediatr Orthop. 2022;42(5):253-259. doi: 10.1097/BPO.0000000000002120.
2
Lengthening in Congenital Femoral Deficiency: A Comparison of Circular External Fixation and a Motorized Intramedullary Nail.先天性股骨缺损的延长治疗:环形外固定与电动髓内钉的比较
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015 Sep 2;97(17):1432-40. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.N.00932.
3
Lengthening With Monolateral External Fixation Versus Magnetically Motorized Intramedullary Nail in Congenital Femoral Deficiency.先天性股骨缺损中单侧外固定延长与电动髓内钉延长的比较
J Pediatr Orthop. 2019 Oct;39(9):458-465. doi: 10.1097/BPO.0000000000001047.
4
Femoral Lengthening in Children-A Comparison Between Magnetic Intramedullary Lengthening Nails and External Fixators.儿童股骨延长术——磁控髓内延长钉与外固定架的比较。
J Pediatr Orthop. 2022 Mar 1;42(3):e290-e294. doi: 10.1097/BPO.0000000000002039.
5
What Are the Potential Benefits and Risks of Using Magnetically Driven Antegrade Intramedullary Lengthening Nails for Femoral Lengthening to Treat Leg Length Discrepancy?使用磁驱动顺行髓内延长钉进行股骨延长治疗肢体长度差异的潜在益处和风险有哪些?
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2022 Apr 1;480(4):790-803. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000002036.
6
Outcomes following femoral lengthening: An initial comparison of the Precice intramedullary lengthening nail and the LRS external fixator monorail system.股骨延长术后的结果:Precice 髓内延长钉与 LRS 外固定单臂系统的初步比较。
Bone Joint J. 2016 Oct;98-B(10):1382-1388. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.98B10.36643.
7
A clinical and radiological matched-pair analysis of patients treated with the PRECICE and STRYDE magnetically driven motorized intramedullary lengthening nails.一项对接受PRECICE和STRYDE磁驱动电动髓内延长钉治疗的患者进行的临床和影像学配对分析。
Bone Joint J. 2023 Jan;105-B(1):88-96. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.105B1.BJJ-2022-0755.R1.
8
Femoral lengthening with a motorized intramedullary nail.使用电动髓内钉进行股骨延长术。
Acta Orthop. 2015 Apr;86(2):248-56. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2014.960647. Epub 2014 Sep 5.
9
Limb Lengthening With Precice Intramedullary Lengthening Nails in Children and Adolescents.肢体延长术与 Precice 髓内延长钉在儿童和青少年中的应用。
J Pediatr Orthop. 2022 Feb 1;42(2):e192-e200. doi: 10.1097/BPO.0000000000002016.
10
Pediatric Lower Limb Lengthening Using the PRECICE Nail: Our Experience With 50 Cases.儿童下肢延长使用 PRECICE 钉:我们 50 例的经验。
J Pediatr Orthop. 2021 Jan;41(1):e44-e49. doi: 10.1097/BPO.0000000000001672.

引用本文的文献

1
Results of Lower Limb Bone Lengthening by Using Motorized and Magnet-Driven Intramedullary Nails to Treat Limb Length Discrepancy.使用电动和磁驱动髓内钉治疗下肢长度差异的下肢骨延长结果。
Cureus. 2025 Jan 10;17(1):e77212. doi: 10.7759/cureus.77212. eCollection 2025 Jan.
2
Complications and risk factors of intramedullary bone lengthening nails: a retrospective multicenter cohort study of 314 FITBONE and PRECICE nails.髓内骨延长钉的并发症和危险因素:314 例 FITBONE 和 PRECICE 钉的回顾性多中心队列研究。
Acta Orthop. 2023 Feb 17;94:51-59. doi: 10.2340/17453674.2023.8479.