How precise is the PRECICE compared to the ISKD in intramedullary limb lengthening?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2014.913955Abstract
Background and purpose — The PRECICE intramedullary limb lengthening system uses a new technique with a magnetic rod and a motorized external remote controller (ERC) with rotational magnetic field. We evaluated the reliability and safety of the PRECICE system.Methods — We compared our preliminary results with PRECICE in 24 patients (26 nails) with the known difficulties in the use of mechanical lengthening devices such as the ISKD. We used the Paley classification for evaluation of problems, obstacles, and complications.Results — 2 nails were primarily without function, and 24/26 nails lengthened over the desired distance. Lengthening desired was 38 mm and lengthening obtained was 37 mm. There were 2 nail breakages, 1 in the welding seam and 1 because of a fall that occurred during consolidation. ERC usage was problematic mostly in patients with femoral lengthening. Adjustment of the ERC was necessary in 10 of 24 cases. 15 cases had implant-associated problems, obstacles were seen in 5 cases, and complications were seen in each of 4 cases.Interpretaion — The reliability of the PRECICE system is comparable to that of other intramedullary lengthening devices such as the ISKD. The motorized external remote controller and its application by the patients is a weak point of the system and needs strict supervision.Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Downloads
Published
2014-06-01
How to Cite
Schiedel, F. M., Vogt, B., Tretow, H. L., Schuhknecht, B., Gosheger, G., Horter, M. J., & Rödl, R. (2014). How precise is the PRECICE compared to the ISKD in intramedullary limb lengthening?. Acta Orthopaedica, 85(3), 293–298. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2014.913955
Issue
Section
Articles
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License.
Acta Orthopaedica (Scandinavica) content is available freely online as from volume 1, 1930. The journal owner owns the copyright for all material published until volume 80, 2009. As of June 2009, the journal has however been published fully Open Access, meaning the authors retain copyright to their work. As of June 2009, articles have been published under CC-BY-NC or CC-BY licenses, unless otherwise specified.