+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Comparison of distraction epiphyseolysis and partial metaphyseal corticotomy in leg lengthening



Comparison of distraction epiphyseolysis and partial metaphyseal corticotomy in leg lengthening



International Orthopaedics 14(4): 405-413



We have used Ilazorov's method of distraction epiphyseolysis for leg lengthening since 1977 and his new method of corticotomy or compactotomy since 1983. The first method was carried out in 22 lower limbs with an average lengthening of 8.25 cm (range 4 to 18 cm); included in this group are 2 patients with achondroplasia in whom both legs were lengthened 12 cm. In the second method, a corticotomy is carried out at the metaphyseal-diaphyseal junction followed by distraction in Ilazorov's apparatus (4 x 0.25 mm a day). We lengthened 30 legs; included are 5 patients who had both legs lengthened from between 8 and 12 cm. In the remainder an average of 7.9 cm of lengthening was achieved (range from 4 to 15 cm). The index for the treatment time per cm achieved (time from operation until full weight-bearing per cm of lengthening) was shorter after distraction epiphyseolysis than after corticotomy. Complications were also a little less after the latter procedure. Distraction epiphyseolysis has to be limited to children from aged 12 years until growth ceases. The advantage with corticotomy is that it can be done at any age from 5 to 30 years. Care is needed in both cases to avoid complications.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 066392823

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 2076928

DOI: 10.1007/bf00182654


Related references

Comparison of distraction epiphyseolysis and partial metaphyseal corticotomy in leg lengthening. International Orthopaedics 15(3): 273, 1991

Leg lengthening by closed metaphyseal corticotomy. Italian Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology 9(2): 139-150, 1983

Distraction epiphyseolysis in lengthening of the lower extremity in children. Khirurgiia 44(7): 121-124, 1968

Experimental animal study on tibia lengthening using distraction epiphyseolysis. Zeitschrift für Orthopadie und ihre Grenzgebiete 111(4): 627-630, 1973

Distraction epiphyseolysis. An experimental study for bone lengthening. Part I. Zeitschrift für Orthopadie und ihre Grenzgebiete 113(2): 189-198, 1975

Distraction epiphyseolysis. An experimental study for bone lengthening. Part II. Zeitschrift für Orthopadie und ihre Grenzgebiete 113(2): 199-208, 1975

Dynamics of reparative regeneration after lengthening by the method of distraction epiphyseolysis. Acta Chirurgiae Plasticae 15(3): 149-154, 1973

Roentgen diagnosis of lengthening of the leg stumps by the method of distraction epiphyseolysis. Ortopediia Travmatologiia i Protezirovanie 34(11): 61-64, 1973

Limb lengthening by diaphyseal corticotomy, callus distraction, and dynamic axial fixation. An experimental study in the ovine femur. Journal of Orthopaedic Research 6(5): 730-735, 1988

Metaphyseal distraction for lower limb lengthening and correction of axial deformities. Journal of Pediatric Orthopedics 10(2): 202-205, 1990

Distraction osteogenesis. A comparison of corticotomy techniques. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 1994(301): 19-24, 1994

Cost Comparison of Femoral Distraction Osteogenesis With External Lengthening Over a Nail Versus Internal Magnetic Lengthening Nail. Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 27(9): E430-E436, 2019

Comparison of bone healing processes in metaphyseal and diaphyseal osteotomy for tibial lengthening an experimental study. Zhonghua Guke Zazhi 8(6): 381-385, 1988

Genu recurvatum caused by partial growth arrest of the proximal tibial physis: Simultaneous correction and lengthening with physeal distraction. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 106(1): 64-68, 1986

Limb lengthening by distraction of the epiphyseal plate. A comparison of two techniques in the rabbit. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume 68(4): 545-549, 1986