Hexapod External Fixators in Bone Defect Treatment

2021 ◽  
pp. 111-131
Author(s):  
Redento Mora ◽  
Luisella Pedrotti ◽  
Barbara Bertani ◽  
Gabriella Tuvo ◽  
Anna Maccabruni
2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (11) ◽  
pp. 3659-3670
Author(s):  
Teng Zhang ◽  
Qingguang Wei ◽  
Hua Zhou ◽  
Zehao Jing ◽  
Xiaoguang Liu ◽  
...  

Injury ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 523-531 ◽  
Author(s):  
Magdalena Tarchala ◽  
Victor Engel ◽  
Jake Barralet ◽  
Edward J. Harvey

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hongjie Wen ◽  
Huagang Yang ◽  
Yongqing Xu

Abstract Background Bone transport is used for the treatment of extensive limb bone defects. The application of ring or unilateral external fixators combined with single or double corticotomy are well documented; however, there are few cases adopting a single corticotomy to repair bone defects > 24 cm. Case presentation The present case study describes an 18-year-old male, who was involved in a traffic accident and was diagnosed with open fracture of the right tibia. The patient received emergency surgery in a local hospital and was transferred to The Second People’s Hospital of Yunnan for further treatment 3 months later. The patient was diagnosed with fracture nonunion and infection following admission. Complete debridement was performed three times to control the infection. The infection was resolved after 26 days and the 24.5 cm massive tibia defect remained the biggest challenge. The bone transport technique involving a unilateral external fixator and single corticotomy was employed to treat the bone defect. Docking site union was achieved and bone consolidation was complete 40 months after corticotomy. The external fixator was subsequently removed. The bone healing index was 1.6 months/cm. The Association for the Study and Application of the Method of Ilizarov criteria (ASAMI) revealed a good functional and bone repair result. Similarly, Knee Society Score (KSS) yielded good result and the The Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) was 65. A total of 45 months after injury, the patient was able to walk painlessly without ambulatory assistive devices and resumed daily activities successfully. Eighteen months after the bone and soft tissue wound have healed, the SF-36 score was 86, and the LEFS was 70. Conclusion To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the present study described the longest bone defect repair performed using bone transport with single level corticotomy.


2013 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 175-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhi-Yong Zhang ◽  
Ai-Wen Huang ◽  
Jun Jun Fan ◽  
Kuanhai Wei ◽  
Dan Jin ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (9) ◽  
pp. 2526 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Rapp ◽  
Ronny Bindl ◽  
Annika Erbacher ◽  
Anne Kruchen ◽  
Markus Rojewski ◽  
...  

The application of autologous mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) for the treatment of bone defects requires two invasive procedures and several weeks of ex vivo cell expansion. To overcome these limitations, the administration of allogeneic MSC may be attractive, because they are anticipated to be immunoprivileged. Because preclinical studies using various animal models are conflicting with respect to the efficacy of allogeneic MSC, we investigated whether autologous and allogeneic human MSC (hMSC) are equally effective in regenerating bone in a humanized mouse model resembling the human immune system. Applying autologous and allogeneic hMSC in critically sized femoral defects, we found that allogeneic hMSC elicited a mild immune response early after implantation, whereas early angiogenic processes were similar in both treatments. At later healing time points, the transplantation of allogeneic hMSC resulted in less bone formation than autologous hMSC, associated with a reduced expression of the osteogenic factor Runx2 and impaired angiogenesis. We found by species-specific staining for collagen-type-1α2 that MSCs of either source did not synthesize new bone matrix, indicating an indirect contribution of transplanted hMSC to bone regeneration. In conclusion, our data suggest that the application of autologous hMSC is superior to that of allogeneic cells for bone defect treatment.


2011 ◽  
Vol 32 (8) ◽  
pp. 1235-1244
Author(s):  
Dandan Su ◽  
Wenkai Chang ◽  
Guiping Ma ◽  
Gang Wu ◽  
Jun Nie

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document