Paley D, Herzenberg J E, Paremain G, Bhave A
Maryland Center for Limb Lengthening and Reconstruction, Baltimore 21207, USA.
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997 Oct;79(10):1464-80. doi: 10.2106/00004623-199710000-00003.
Twenty-nine patients (thirty-two femora) had femoral lengthening over an intramedullary nail, with the nail and the external fixator applied concomitantly at the time of the femoral osteotomy. After gradual distraction at a rate of one millimeter per day, the nail was locked and the fixator was removed. The mean age was twenty-six years (range, ten to fifty-three years), and the mean amount of lengthening was 5.8 centimeters (range, two to thirteen centimeters). For comparison, thirty-one patients (thirty-two limbs) who had had standard Ilizarov femoral lengthening were matched with the group that had had lengthening over an intramedullary nail; the matching was performed on the basis of the amount of lengthening, the age of the patient, the etiology of the indication for lengthening, and the level of difficulty of the procedure. Lengthening over an intramedullary nail reduced the average duration of external fixation by almost one-half. The radiographic consolidation index (the number of months needed for radiographic consolidation for each centimeter of lengthening) for the limbs that had had lengthening over an intramedullary nail was reduced significantly (p < 0.001) compared with that for the matched-case group. The range of motion of the knee returned to normal a mean of 2.2 times faster in the group that had had lengthening over an intramedullary nail. There were six refractures of the distraction bone in the matched-case group. In the group that had had lengthening over an intramedullary nail, one nail and one proximal locking screw failed. The over-all rate of complications was 1.4 per cent in the group that had had lengthening over an intramedullary nail compared with 1.9 per cent in the matched-case group. With the numbers of patients available for study, we could not detect a significant difference between the groups with respect to the operative time (p = 0.124); however, the cost of treatment and the estimated blood loss were higher in the group that had had lengthening over an intramedullary nail. On the basis of clinical and radiographic criteria, there were twenty-three excellent, seven good, and two fair results in the group that had had lengthening over an intramedullary nail compared with twenty-six excellent, four good, and two fair results in the matched-case group (p = 0.37). The advantages of lengthening over an intramedullary nail include a decrease in the duration of external fixation, protection against refracture, and earlier rehabilitation.
29例患者(32侧股骨)采用髓内钉进行股骨延长,在股骨截骨时同时应用髓内钉和外固定架。以每天1毫米的速度逐渐延长后,锁定髓内钉并拆除固定架。平均年龄为26岁(范围10至53岁),平均延长长度为5.8厘米(范围2至13厘米)。作为对照,将31例(32侧肢体)采用标准伊里扎洛夫技术进行股骨延长的患者与髓内钉延长组进行匹配;匹配基于延长长度、患者年龄、延长指征的病因以及手术难度水平。髓内钉延长使外固定的平均时间减少了近一半。与匹配病例组相比,髓内钉延长组肢体的影像学骨愈合指数(每延长1厘米所需的影像学骨愈合月数)显著降低(p<0.001)。髓内钉延长组膝关节活动度恢复正常的平均速度快2.2倍。匹配病例组有6例牵张段骨发生骨折。髓内钉延长组有1根髓内钉和1枚近端锁定螺钉出现故障。髓内钉延长组的总体并发症发生率为1.4%,而匹配病例组为1.9%。根据现有可研究的患者数量,两组在手术时间方面未检测到显著差异(p = 0.124);然而,髓内钉延长组的治疗费用和估计失血量更高。根据临床和影像学标准,髓内钉延长组有23例优、7例良、2例可,而匹配病例组有26例优、4例良、2例可(p = 0.37)。髓内钉延长的优点包括减少外固定时间、防止骨折以及更早康复。