ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Tibial lengthening in congenital pseudoarthrosis of the tibia: a scoping review.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCongenital pseudoarthrosis of the tibia (CPT) is a rare, sinister condition that is often associated with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1). Even after achieving union, patients frequently present with significant leg length discrepancy (LLD) due to growth disturbance and repeated reconstructive surgeries. Tibial lengthening using distraction osteogenesis is commonly performed, yet outcomes and complications remain poorly understood.
objectiveTo systematically map the available literature on tibial lengthening in CPT, describe surgical techniques, summarize reported outcomes, and identify research gaps.
methodsA scoping review was conducted following Arksey and O'Malley's framework and the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. The PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases were searched. Eligible studies included those reporting tibial lengthening during CPT. Data on patient demographics, surgical techniques, length achieved, union rates, complications, and follow-up were extracted.
resultsThirty-one studies involving 486 patients were included. All studies were retrospective. The mean age at lengthening ranged from 3.2 to 33.7 years. NF1 was present in 70% of the patients. The Ilizarov external fixator in isolation or with hybrid techniques was the most frequently reported lengthening modality. The mean lengthening achieved was 5.5 cm (range 1.5-10.2 cm). The most common site of lengthening was through proximal tibial osteotomy followed by physeal distraction. Complications such as pin tract infection, regenerate fractures and tibial bowing deformities were commonly encountered. The follow-up period ranged from 1.6 to 24 years.
conclusionsTibial lengthening is feasible in CPT and can achieve meaningful limb length equalization. However, complication rates remain high, and evidence is limited by the small number of retrospective studies. Standardized outcome reporting and prospective multicenter collaboration are needed to optimize care.
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.