Novel piston technique versus Ilizarov technique for the repair of bone defect after lower limb infection

Abstract Background We aimed to compare the effectiveness and complications of a novel piston technique versus the Ilizarov technique for the repair of bone defects after lower limb infection. Patients and methods We retrospectively reviewed 41 patients who had been treated at our department for low...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Jiafei Du, Zifei Yin, Pengfei Cheng, Pei Han, Hao Shen
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	BMC 2021
Materias:	Ilizarov technique Piston technique Masquelet Induced membrane Bone defect Lower limb infection Orthopedic surgery RD701-811 Diseases of the musculoskeletal system RC925-935
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/796419bb61fb499cbe32e37e27417f80
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:796419bb61fb499cbe32e37e27417f80
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:796419bb61fb499cbe32e37e27417f802021-12-05T12:19:20ZNovel piston technique versus Ilizarov technique for the repair of bone defect after lower limb infection10.1186/s13018-021-02844-11749-799Xhttps://doaj.org/article/796419bb61fb499cbe32e37e27417f802021-12-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-021-02844-1https://doaj.org/toc/1749-799XAbstract Background We aimed to compare the effectiveness and complications of a novel piston technique versus the Ilizarov technique for the repair of bone defects after lower limb infection. Patients and methods We retrospectively reviewed 41 patients who had been treated at our department for lower extremity bone defects following osteomyelitis. There were 38 men and three women with a mean age of 43.41 (range, 12–69 years). The infected bone defects involved 36 tibias and five femurs. The piston technique (PT, group A) was used in 12 patients and the Ilizarov technique (IT, group B) in 29 patients. The mean follow-up period was 28.50 months (PT) and 29.90 months (IT). The modified Application of Methods of Illizarov (ASAMI) criteria was used to evaluate bone healing and functional recovery. Results Complete eradication of the infection and union of docking sites were accomplished in both groups. The mean external fixator index (EFI) was 42.32 days/cm in group A versus 58.85 days/cm in group B (p < 0.001). The bone outcomes were similar between groups A and B (p = 0.558) (excellent [9 vs. 19], good [3 vs.10]); group A showed better functional outcomes than group B (p < 0.05) (excellent [7 vs. 6], good [4 vs. 12], fair [0 vs. 10] and poor [1 vs. 1]). Pain was the most common complaint during follow-up, and group A had fewer cases of pin tract infection (1 vs. 6), adjacent joint stiffness (3 vs. 8), and delayed healing of the joint (0 vs. 3). Conclusions Satisfactory bone healing can be achieved by using both PT and IT, although PT demonstrated better functional results, lower EFI, and allowed early removal of the external fixation. We found that this novel piston technique can improve the comfort of patients, reduce the incidence of complications, and provide rapid and convenient rehabilitation.Jiafei DuZifei YinPengfei ChengPei HanHao ShenBMCarticleIlizarov techniquePiston techniqueMasqueletInduced membraneBone defectLower limb infectionOrthopedic surgeryRD701-811Diseases of the musculoskeletal systemRC925-935ENJournal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, Vol 16, Iss 1, Pp 1-8 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Ilizarov technique Piston technique Masquelet Induced membrane Bone defect Lower limb infection Orthopedic surgery RD701-811 Diseases of the musculoskeletal system RC925-935
spellingShingle	Ilizarov technique Piston technique Masquelet Induced membrane Bone defect Lower limb infection Orthopedic surgery RD701-811 Diseases of the musculoskeletal system RC925-935 Jiafei Du Zifei Yin Pengfei Cheng Pei Han Hao Shen Novel piston technique versus Ilizarov technique for the repair of bone defect after lower limb infection
description	Abstract Background We aimed to compare the effectiveness and complications of a novel piston technique versus the Ilizarov technique for the repair of bone defects after lower limb infection. Patients and methods We retrospectively reviewed 41 patients who had been treated at our department for lower extremity bone defects following osteomyelitis. There were 38 men and three women with a mean age of 43.41 (range, 12–69 years). The infected bone defects involved 36 tibias and five femurs. The piston technique (PT, group A) was used in 12 patients and the Ilizarov technique (IT, group B) in 29 patients. The mean follow-up period was 28.50 months (PT) and 29.90 months (IT). The modified Application of Methods of Illizarov (ASAMI) criteria was used to evaluate bone healing and functional recovery. Results Complete eradication of the infection and union of docking sites were accomplished in both groups. The mean external fixator index (EFI) was 42.32 days/cm in group A versus 58.85 days/cm in group B (p < 0.001). The bone outcomes were similar between groups A and B (p = 0.558) (excellent [9 vs. 19], good [3 vs.10]); group A showed better functional outcomes than group B (p < 0.05) (excellent [7 vs. 6], good [4 vs. 12], fair [0 vs. 10] and poor [1 vs. 1]). Pain was the most common complaint during follow-up, and group A had fewer cases of pin tract infection (1 vs. 6), adjacent joint stiffness (3 vs. 8), and delayed healing of the joint (0 vs. 3). Conclusions Satisfactory bone healing can be achieved by using both PT and IT, although PT demonstrated better functional results, lower EFI, and allowed early removal of the external fixation. We found that this novel piston technique can improve the comfort of patients, reduce the incidence of complications, and provide rapid and convenient rehabilitation.
format	article
author	Jiafei Du Zifei Yin Pengfei Cheng Pei Han Hao Shen
author_facet	Jiafei Du Zifei Yin Pengfei Cheng Pei Han Hao Shen
author_sort	Jiafei Du
title	Novel piston technique versus Ilizarov technique for the repair of bone defect after lower limb infection
title_short	Novel piston technique versus Ilizarov technique for the repair of bone defect after lower limb infection
title_full	Novel piston technique versus Ilizarov technique for the repair of bone defect after lower limb infection
title_fullStr	Novel piston technique versus Ilizarov technique for the repair of bone defect after lower limb infection
title_full_unstemmed	Novel piston technique versus Ilizarov technique for the repair of bone defect after lower limb infection
title_sort	novel piston technique versus ilizarov technique for the repair of bone defect after lower limb infection
publisher	BMC
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/796419bb61fb499cbe32e37e27417f80
work_keys_str_mv	AT jiafeidu novelpistontechniqueversusilizarovtechniquefortherepairofbonedefectafterlowerlimbinfection AT zifeiyin novelpistontechniqueversusilizarovtechniquefortherepairofbonedefectafterlowerlimbinfection AT pengfeicheng novelpistontechniqueversusilizarovtechniquefortherepairofbonedefectafterlowerlimbinfection AT peihan novelpistontechniqueversusilizarovtechniquefortherepairofbonedefectafterlowerlimbinfection AT haoshen novelpistontechniqueversusilizarovtechniquefortherepairofbonedefectafterlowerlimbinfection
_version_	1718372025294127104

Novel piston technique versus Ilizarov technique for the repair of bone defect after lower limb infection

Ejemplares similares