Bilateral humeral lengthening through unilateral external fixators in rhizomelic achondroplasia - how endangered is the radial nerve?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Laufer ◽  
A Frommer ◽  
G Gosheger ◽  
R Rödl ◽  
AM Rachbauer ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
pp. 155633162199633
Author(s):  
Sherif Galal ◽  
Jonggu Shin ◽  
Peter Principe ◽  
Rena Mehta ◽  
Nathan Khabyeh-Hasbani ◽  
...  

Introduction: Magnetic internal lengthening nails (MILNs) have been used for humeral lengthening to avoid complications associated with external fixation. Purpose/Questions: We compared the 1-year Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, adjacent joint range of motion (ROM), bone healing index (BHI), length achieved, distraction rate, and complications when lengthening the humerus using MILN vs using external fixation. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 18 patients (22 humeri) from January 2001 to March 2020 divided into 2 groups, the MILN group (7 patients, 7 humeri) and the mono-lateral fixator group (11 patients, 15 humeri). Results: The MILN group showed larger improvement of DASH scores (average 26.8 and 8 for MILN and fixator groups, respectively), less loss of elbow ROM (average 5° and 7° for MILN and fixator groups, respectively), and shorter time to full recovery of elbow ROM (average 39 days and 122 days for MILN and fixator groups, respectively). In the MILN group, there was slower distraction rate (average 0.66 mm/day and 0.86 mm/day for MILN and fixator groups, respectively), less lengthening achieved (average 5.2 cm and 7 cm for MILN and fixator group, respectively), and a lower lengthening percentage (average 19% and 41% for MILN and fixator group, respectively). Bone healing index (BHI) of 0.94 and 0.99 months/cm for the MILN and the fixator groups were similar. Conclusion: Humeral lengthening using the MILN allowed for early full recovery of joint ROM with comparable functional and radiographic outcomes compared with using external fixators.


2015 ◽  
Vol 97-B (11) ◽  
pp. 1577-1581 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. I. Balci ◽  
M. Kocaoglu ◽  
C. Sen ◽  
L. Eralp ◽  
S. G. Batibay ◽  
...  

Hand ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 155894472098812
Author(s):  
J. Megan M. Patterson ◽  
Stephanie A. Russo ◽  
Madi El-Haj ◽  
Christine B. Novak ◽  
Susan E. Mackinnon

Background: Radial nerve injuries cause profound disability, and a variety of reconstruction options exist. This study aimed to compare outcomes of tendon transfers versus nerve transfers for the management of isolated radial nerve injuries. Methods: A retrospective chart review of 30 patients with isolated radial nerve injuries treated with tendon transfers and 16 patients managed with nerve transfers was performed. Fifteen of the 16 patients treated with nerve transfer had concomitant pronator teres to extensor carpi radialis brevis tendon transfer for wrist extension. Preoperative and postoperative strength data, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores, and quality-of-life (QOL) scores were compared before and after surgery and compared between groups. Results: For the nerve transfer group, patients were significantly younger, time from injury to surgery was significantly shorter, and follow-up time was significantly longer. Both groups demonstrated significant improvements in grip and pinch strength after surgery. Postoperative grip strength was significantly higher in the nerve transfer group. Postoperative pinch strength did not differ between groups. Similarly, both groups showed an improvement in DASH and QOL scores after surgery with no significant differences between the 2 groups. Conclusions: The nerve transfer group demonstrated greater grip strength, but both groups had improved pain, function, and satisfaction postoperatively. Patients who present early and can tolerate longer time to functional recovery would be optimal candidates for nerve transfers. Both tendon transfers and nerve transfers are good options for patients with radial nerve palsy.


Author(s):  
Marco Becciolini ◽  
Christopher Pivec ◽  
Andrea Raspanti ◽  
Georg Riegler

2010 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. E55-E56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyung-Cheon Kim ◽  
Kwang-Jin Rhee ◽  
Hyun-Dae Shin ◽  
Young-Mo Kim ◽  
Dong Kyu Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Rebekah Belayneh ◽  
Connor P. Littlefield ◽  
Sanjit R. Konda ◽  
Kari Broder ◽  
David N. Kugelman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document