ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2016
Is there an Increase in Valgus Deviation in Tibial Distraction Using the Lengthening Over Nail Technique?
Article in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Aesthetic lower limb lengthening techniques: a systematic review of efficacy, complications, and patient satisfaction.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Pooled it
- Measuring more than just centimeters: a scoping review of outcome measures in cosmetic stature lengthening.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Review
- An Approach to Intraoperatively Identify the Coronal Plane Deformities of the Distal Tibia When Treating Tibial Fractures with Intramedullary Nail Fixation: a Retrospective Study.Orthopaedic surgery · 2022Article
- Complications and functional, psychological outcomes of bilateral tibial lengthening over intramedullary nail: evidence from Vietnam.International orthopaedics · 2021Article
- Regenerate Deformity with the Precice Tibial Nail.Strategies in trauma and limb reconstructionArticle
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuring tibial lengthening, the soft tissues of the posterolateral compartment produce distraction-resisting forces causing valgus angulation. Although this occurs with the classic Ilizarov method, whether a valgus deformity develops with the lengthening over nail (LON) technique is questioned, because the intramedullary nail is thought to resist deforming forces and adequately maintain alignment of the distracted bone. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purposes of this study were to (1) determine the amount of valgus deviation during tibial lengthening with the LON technique; and (2) analyze the factors that may be associated with valgus deviation with the LON technique.
methodsBetween June 2009 and September 2013, we performed 346 tibial lengthenings using the LON technique, lengthening and then nail technique, or lengthening with an intramedullary lengthening device. Sixty patients (120 tibias) who underwent bilateral lower leg lengthening with the LON technique were enrolled in this retrospective study. To limit the number of variables, we analyzed only the right tibia in all patients (60 tibias). The mean followup was 42 months (range, 26-71 months). The mean age of the patients was 25 years (range, 18-40 years). There were 36 male and 24 female patients. The mean final length gain was 67 ± 9 mm. The mean time for distraction was 100 ± 25 days. The overall valgus deviation was assessed by measuring the change in the medial proximal tibial angle and mechanical femorotibial angle on radiographs obtained before and after surgery and after completion of lengthening. Several demographic, surgical, and distraction-related variables were considered possible factors to prevent valgus deviation: proximal fixation method; presence of a blocking screw; diameter and length of the intramedullary nail; degree of nail insertion; length of the nail in the distal segment after completion of distraction; final length gain; and patient's BMI. During the period studied, the blocking screw was to maintain the mechanical axis in patients who had neutral or valgus alignment preoperatively, or to prevent more valgus change in patients who underwent acute correction of varus deformity intraoperatively. Uni- and multivariate analyses were conducted.
resultsValgus deviation occurred during the tibial LON. The medial proximal tibial angle increased from 86° (95% CI, 85°-86°) to 90° (95% CI, 89°-91°) (p < 0.001). The mechanical femorotibial angle changed from 2.2° varus (95% CI, 3°-1.4° varus) to 2.6° valgus (95% CI, 1.8°-3.4° valgus) (p < 0.001). Valgus deviation was evident in proximal and distal segments. In the multivariate regression model, use of a blocking screw was the only factor that was associated with decreased valgus deviation, and its effect size, although detectable, was small (-2.62; 95% CI, -4.65 to -0.59; p = 0.013).
conclusionsWe found that valgus deviation does occur during tibial lengthening using the LON technique, but that blocking screw placement may help to minimize the likelihood that severe valgus deviation will occur. Future prospective studies should be conducted to confirm this preliminary finding. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.