OpenAlex · Aktualisierung stündlich · Letzte Aktualisierung: 31.03.2026, 21:08

Dies ist eine Übersichtsseite mit Metadaten zu dieser wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Der vollständige Artikel ist beim Verlag verfügbar.

Reconstruction of Long Segmental Tibial Bone Defect Using the Bone Transport Compared to Acute Shortening and Re-lengthening : A Retrospective Study

2021·1 Zitationen·Research SquareOpen Access
Volltext beim Verlag öffnen

1

Zitationen

6

Autoren

2021

Jahr

Abstract

Abstract Background: Ilizarov technique has been widely used to salvage bone defects. However, treating large bone defects remains a challenge for surgeons. The aim of this study was to compare bone transport with acute shortening/re-lengthening in a series of large tibial segmental defects. Method: A total of 39 patients (29 males, 10 females) with large tibial segmental defects were treated with the Ilizarov technique (Group A: bone transport in 23 cases; Group B: acute shortening/re-lengthening 16 in cases) from March 2010 to December 2018. The mean age was 38.7 years (range24 years to 55 years). The average bone defect size was 8.82 cm (range from 6 cm to 12 cm). The demographic data, operation duration, docking time, external fixation time, and external fixation index were retrospectively documented and analyzed. Complications that occur during the treatment were classified. The clinical outcomes were evaluated by the Association for the Study and Application of the Method of Ilizarov criteria (ASAMI) at the last clinical visit. Result: There were no statistically significant differences (P>0.05) in the demographic data of the two groups. There was no significant difference in operation duration between the two groups. The docking time in group A was longer than that in group B (93.26±19.52 days, 58.44±14.23 days, P<0.001). No statistical significance was obversed for the external fixation time in the two groups (330.87±88.52 days in group A, 321.25±56.67 days in group B,P=0.704). A higher external fixation index was presented in group A (38.32±5.39 days/cm) than group B (35.17±2.14 days/cm) (P=0.033). There was no significant difference between the two groups in ASAMI bone results and functional results (Table 4). Complications were more prevalent in group A (28 complications of 23 patients), while less in group B (7 complications of 16 patients) (P<0.05). Conclusion: Both bone transport and acute shortening/re-lengthening technique can achieve satisfactory clinical outcomes in the reconstruction of long segmental tibial bone defect caused by infection using a monolateral rail external fixator. The acute shortening/re-lengthening can significantly decrease the docking time, external fixation index, and complications compared with bone transport.

Ähnliche Arbeiten