ArticleStrategies in trauma and limb reconstruction
Consent in Limb Lengthening Surgery: Predicting the True Incidence of Material Risk.
Article in Strategies in trauma and limb reconstruction. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Magnetic Intramedullary Lengthening Nails for Complex Lower Extremity Reconstruction: Functional Outcomes, Bone Healing, and Complications.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Treatment of infected tibial nonunion with angular deformity and shortening using the Masquelet technique combined with the Ilizarov technique: A case report.Trauma case reports · 2026Article
- Mechanism Failures in Externally Controlled Motorized Intramedullary Lengthening Nails: A Systematic Review.JB & JS open accessReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: The consent process involves supported decision-making between the surgeon and the patient. Both potential benefits and material risks of the procedure require explanation, with adequate time for reflection. The complexity of limb reconstruction surgery includes the potential for multiple types of complications. In an attempt to delineate the material risks in lower limb lengthening, a literature review was undertaken to ascertain the published rates of complications. Materials and methods: A review of articles from 2003 to 2023 via PubMed and Google Scholar, including keywords 'lengthening', 'tibia', 'lengthening nail' and 'external fixator' was undertaken. Studies with a minimum of 20 patients, undergoing lengthening of the femur, tibia, or both by an external fixator and/or an intramedullary lengthening nail were included for analysis. Complications were reported according to Paley's problems, obstacles, and complications. Results: Twenty-two papers met the inclusion criteria. The commonest complications listed following lengthening using an external fixator were pin site infections (52% in the femur and 18.8% in the tibia), delayed consolidation (8.3%), bone re-fracture (13%), and joint stiffness (18.8%). Following femoral lengthening using the intramedullary lengthening nails reported complication rates were lower, including implant issues (8%) and delayed consolidation (6%). Conclusion: Patients require a full understanding of both benefits and potential harms when undergoing any surgical intervention. Our study has identified the published rates of complications following lower limb lengthening. These figures can be used to guide the consultation and enable surgeons to audit their own surgical results against the published literature. How to cite this article: Makvana S, Robertson A, Britten S,
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.