Abstract
Introduction
There are various methods of long bone lengthening. The quality of the regenerated bone depends on stable external fixation, low energy corticotomy, latency period, optimum lengthening rate and rhythm, and functional use of the limb. Percutaneous corticotomy and ostetomy with multiple drill holes yield the best results for the quality of the regenerated bone. An alternative low energy osteotomy, which respects the periosteum, is the Afghan percutaneous osteotomy. The purpose of the current study was to compare a percutaneous multiple drill hole osteotomy with a Gigli saw osteotomy in terms of the healing index (HI).
Materials and methods
Forty-four tibias of 41 patients were lengthened at our institution between 1995 and 2000. All patients underwent limb lengthening without any deformity correction by the Ilizarov device. The etiology of the limb length discrepancy was sequelae to poliomyelitis in 16 tibias, idiopathic hypoplasia in 17 tibias, posttraumatic discrepancy in 5 tibias, bilateral tibial lengthening in achondroplastic dwarfism in 3 patients. Patients with metabolic bone diseases were not included in this series.
Results
The mean amount of length discrepancy was 5.7 cm (range 2–12 cm). The mean HI of the whole group was 1.65 month/cm (range 1.1–2.4 month/cm). When comparing the osteotomy methods without taking the etiology into consideration, the percutaneous, multiple drill hole group yielded a mean HI of 1.98 month/cm (range 1.4–2.4 month/cm), while the Gigli saw group yielded a mean HI of 1.37 month/cm (range 1.1–1.8 month/cm). There was a statistically significant difference between the two groups (p=0.022). The Gigli saw patients with poliomyelitis had a significantly better HI compared with patients who underwent lengthening by the other form of osteotomy (1.1 vs 1.9 month/cm; p=0.027).
Conclusion
Our results confirm the biologic superiority of the Gigli saw technique.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Codivilla A (1905) On the means of lengthening in the lower limbs, muscles and tissues, which are shortened through deformity. Am J Orthop Surg 2:353–369
Debastiani G, Aldegheri R, Renzi-Dirivio L, Trivella G (1987) Limb lengthening by callus distraction (callotasis). J Pediatr Orthop 7:129–134
Frierson M, Ibrahim K, Boles M, Bote H, Ganey T (1994) Distraction osteogenesis. A comparison of corticotomy techniques. Clin Orthop 301:19–24
Ilizarov G (1989) The tension stress effect on the genesis and growth of tissues. Part I. The influence of stability of fixation and soft tissue preservation. Clin Orthop 238:249–261
Ilizarov G (1989)The tension stress effect on the genesis and growth of tissues. Part II. The influence of the rate and frequency of distraction. Clin Orthop 238:263–285
Paktiss AS, Gross RH (1993) Technique, Afghan percutaneous osteotomy. J Pediatr Orthop 13:531–533
Paley D, Tetsworth K (1991) Percutaneous osteotomies: osteotome and gigli saw techniques. Orthop Clin North Am 22:613–624
Paley D, Herzenberg JE, Bowen JR (2000) Multiplier method for predicting limb-length discrepancy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82:1432–1446
Stanitski DF, Shahcheraghi H., Nicker DA, Armstrong PF (1996) Results of tibial lengthening with the Ilizarov technique. J Pediatr Orthop 16:168–172
Wagner H (1977) Surgical lengthenings for shortening of femur and tibia; technique and indications. Prog Orthop Surg 1:71–94
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Eralp, L., Kocaoğlu, M., Özkan, K. et al. A comparison of two osteotomy techniques for tibial lengthening. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 124, 298–300 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-004-0646-9
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-004-0646-9