Comparison of the use of intramedullary telescopic system and titanium elastic rods in children with osteogenesis imperfecta I and III types

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) is a rare disease characterized by frequent fractures and deformities of the bone skeleton due to collagen abnormalities. Clinically, OI is heterogeneous in its features and varies in severity. Frequent fractures as a result of brittle bones lead to malunion and deformity, which increases the risk of refraction. Surgical treatment of children with imperfect osteogenesis is aimed at reducing the number of fractures, the formation of deformities and improving the quality of life of the child. According to the literature, two main methods of intramedullary osteosynthesis in the surgical treatment of children with OI can be distinguished: static rods and a “growing” metal structure.

Aim. To compare the frequency of revisions and complications when using titanium elastic rods (TEN) and the Fassier-Duval telescopic system (FD) in the treatment of fractures and deformities of long bones in children with OI type I (mild disease) and type III (severe disease).

Materials and methods. A retrospective and prospective analysis of the results of surgical treatment in 38 children with OI using two different methods of intramedullary osteosynthesis was carried out. Among them, 26 children (68% of all studied patients) were of type III and 12 (32%) children of type I. The mean age of the patients was 7.8 years [5.2, 10.8]. The 1st study group (retrospective) included 17 patients (45% of all patients) who underwent surgical treatment with the installation of titanium elastic rods (TEN). A total of 46 surgical interventions were performed. Surgical treatment with the installation of titanium elastic rods (TEN) for patients was carried out in other medical institutions before hospitalization at the National Medical Research Center for Children's Health. The 2nd study group (prospective) included 21 patients (55% of the total number of patients in the study), who were implanted with FD telescopic rods, 53 surgical interventions were performed. Patients of the prospective group received surgical treatment on the basis of the neuroorthopedic department of the National Research Center for Children's Health. The study groups were structured as follows: Study Group 1 consisted of 2 subgroups. Subgroup A included 6 patients with OI type I, subgroup B included 11 patients with OI type III; The 2nd study group was represented by two subgroups. Subgroup C included 6 patients with OI type I, and subgroup D included 15 patients with OI type III. A total of 228 segments of the upper and lower extremities (humerus, femur and tibia) were examined. Surgical treatment using intramedullary osteosynthesis was performed on 99 segments. The average period of postoperative follow-up was 20 months (from 16.5 to 24.5 months), the data collection of the retrospective group was carried out in the period from 2015–2022, the prospective group from 2017–2022. Analysis of the results of surgical treatment according to the following criteria: the frequency of migration of metal structures, the formation of bone deformities, the number of bone fractures with an installed metal fixator in two different methods of osteosynthesis, as well as the number of revisions in OI types I and III. The results of motor activity in the retrospective and prospective groups were assessed using two scales (the Hoffer–Bullock scale, the Gillette Functional Assessment Questionnaire score scale), before the start of surgical treatment and after 20 months. The statistical analysis was performed using the Matplotlib, SciPy, Pandas и NumPy modules in Python 3.8. In all cases, the distribution was different from normal. The comparison of the independent groups was carried out using the Mann–Whitney test (in the case of comparing two samples), while the comparison of the dependent groups was carried out using the Wilcoxon test. To compare the distribution of the categorical features, the Pearson chi-square test and Fisher's exact test (with the number of observations in one of the cells in the table 2×25) for the independent groups, and McNemar’s test for the dependent groups were used. In all cases, when the multiple comparisons were made, the level of the significance of p was recalculated using the Bonferroni correction. Hypothesis testing was two-sided; the values of p<0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results. According to the comparison of two subgroups of the 1st study group, it was noted that fractures in two subgroups after the installation of static intramedullary nails occurred with an equal frequency (p-value>0.999). Among patients with OI type I, migration was observed in 13% of cases (2 segments), with OI type III in 48%. Deformity in type I OI was formed in 13% of cases, in type III in 39%. Revisions in children with type I OI were required in 13% of cases, in children with type III in 32%. According to the comparison of two subgroups of the 2nd study group, it was noted that fractures and migrations in two subgroups after the installation of a telescopic metal structure occurred with equal frequency (p-value>0.999). Deformity in type I OI was not formed, in type III it was 18%. Revisions in children with type I OI were required in 7.7% of cases, in children with type III in 15%. A comparative analysis of the results of surgical treatment of children with type I OI who underwent TEN osteosynthesis and children with type III OI who used a telescopic metal fixator demonstrates the absence of statistically significant differences in deformities, migrations, and revisions (p-value>0.999). Also, in the group of children with OI type III, osteosynthesis of which was performed by FD, there is a decrease in the risk of re-fracture by 10%, in comparison with the group of children with OI type I, osteosynthesis of which was performed by TEN. Also, according to the data of statistical processing, surgical treatment of children with OI type III using an intramedullary telescopic system makes it possible to achieve a level of motor activity comparable to the group of patients with OI type I (p-value=0.344), where osteosynthesis was performed using TEN.

Conclusion. The TEN method is a reliable method of treatment in children with OI type I, it is comparable to the method of telescopic metal construction in children with OI type I in terms of the frequency of migrations (p-value>0.999). However, the risk of repeated surgical interventions is increased by 5.3% compared with FD, the frequency of fractures is higher by 12.3%, the formation of deformities by 13%. The use of “growing” hardware in children with type III reduces the risk of possible refracture by 9%, migration by 36%, deformity by 21% and the number of revisions by 17% compared with static rods. Patients who underwent FD osteosynthesis showed higher results of motor activity than patients who underwent TEN osteosynthesis. The results of the frequency of complications and revisions in the group of patients with OI type III, in which osteosynthesis was performed by the telescopic FD system, are comparable with the group of patients with OI type I, in which osteosynthesis was performed with TEN static rods. The quality of life and motor activity of children in the group with a severe course, whose osteosynthesis was carried out with a “growing” metal structure, reaches the level of patients with a mild course of the disease, whose osteosynthesis was performed using TEN (p-value=0.344). The method of choice in the surgical treatment of children with OI, both in type I and type III, is a “growing” intramedullary metal structure. The use of static rods is acceptable in OI type I, however, it should be taken into account that this metal structure is effective for the first 12 months, later, due to the inability to reinforce the bone throughout its entire length, the risk of possible complications increases.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Katerina N. Solodovnikova

National Medical Research Center for Children's Health

Author for correspondence.
Email: katakrylova0701@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8519-1445

Graduate Student, National Medical Research Center for Children's Health

Russian Federation, Moscow

Konstantin V. Zherdev

National Medical Research Center for Children's Health; Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University)

Email: drzherdev@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3698-6011

D. Sci. (Med.), National Medical Research Center for Children's Health, Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University (Sechenov University)

Russian Federation, Moscow; Moscow

Oleg B. Сhelpachenko

National Medical Research Center for Children's Health

Email: Chelpachenko81@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0333-3105

D. Sci. (Med.), National Medical Research Center for Children's Health

Russian Federation, Moscow

Margarita A. Soloshenko

National Medical Research Center for Children's Health

Email: margosoloshenko@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6150-0880

Cand. Sci. (Med.), Assoc. Prof., National Medical Research Center for Children's Health

Russian Federation, Moscow

Sergey P. Yatsyk

National Medical Research Center for Children's Health

Email: makadamia@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6966-1040

D. Sci. (Med.), Prof., Corr. Memb. RAS. National Medical Research Center for Children's Health

Russian Federation, Moscow

Anna A. Ovechkina

National Medical Research Center for Children's Health

Email: asha83@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-8720-9728

Pediatric Surgeon, National Medical Research Center for Children's Health

Russian Federation, Moscow

Andrey S. Butenko

National Medical Research Center for Children's Health

Email: oversoul@live.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7542-8218

Surgeon, Traumatologist-Orthopedist, National Medical Research Center for Children's Health

Russian Federation, Moscow

References

  1. Rauch F, Glorieux FH. Osteogenesis imperfecta. Lancet. 2004;363(9418):1377-85.
  2. Van Dijk FS, Sillence DO. Osteogenesis imperfecta: clinical diagnosis, nomenclature and severity assessment. Am J Med Genet A. 2014;164A(6):1470-81.
  3. Lin HY, Lin SP, Chuang CK, et al. Clinical features of osteogenesis imperfecta in Taiwan. J Formos Med Assoc. 2009;108(7):570-6.
  4. Oduah G, Firth G, Pettifor JM, Thandrayen K. Management of osteogenesis imperfecta at the Chris Hani Baragwanath Hospital. SA Orthopaedic Journal. 2017;16(2):19-25.
  5. Бурцев М.Е., Фролов А.В., Логвинов А.Н., и др. Современный подход к диагностике и лечение детей с несовершенным остеогенезом. Ортопедия, травматология и восстановительная хирургия детского возраста. 2019;7(2):87-102 [Burtsev ME, Frolov AV, Logvinov AN, et al. Current approach to diagnosis and treatment of children with osteogenesis imperfecta. Pediatric Traumatology, Orthopaedics and Reconstructive Surgery. 2019;7(2):87-102 (in Russian)].
  6. Sofield HA, Millar EA. Fragmentation, realignment and intramedullary rod fixation of deformities of the long bones in children. A ten-year appraisal. J Bone Joint Surg. 1959;41-A(8):1371-91.
  7. Birke O, Davies N, Latimer M, et al. Experience with the telescopic rod: first 24 consecutive cases with a minimum of 1 year follow up. J Pediatr Orthop. 2011;31(4):458-64.
  8. Бурцев М.Е., Фролов А.В., Логвинов А.Н., и др. Хирургическое лечение оскольчатого внутрисуставного перелома дистальной трети бедренной кости у пациента с несовершенным остеогенезом I типа. Ортопедия, травматология и восстановительная хирургия детского возраста. 2019;7(1):87-96 [Burtsev ME, Frolov AV, Logvinov AN, et al. Surgical treatment of comminuted intraarticular distal femur fracture in patient with osteogenesis imperfecta type I. Ortopediia, travmatologiia i vosstanovitel'naia khirurgiia detskogo vozrasta. 2019;7(1):87-96 (in Russian)]. doi: 10.17816/PTORS7187-96
  9. Luhmann SJ, Sheridan JJ, Capelli AM, et al. Management of lower-extremity deformities in osteogenesis imperfecta with extensible intramedullary rod technique: A 20-year experience. J Pediatr Orthop. 1998;18(1):88-94.
  10. Joseph B, Rebello G, Kant CB. The choice of intramedullary devices for the femur and the tibia in osteogenesis imperfecta. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2005;14(5):311-9.
  11. Azzam KA, Rush ET, Burke BR, et al. Mid-term results of femoral and tibial osteotomies and Fassier-Duval nailing in children with osteogenesis imperfecta. J Pediatr Orthop. 2018;38(6):331-6.
  12. Fassier FR. Osteogenesis Imperfecta–Who Needs Rodding Surgery? Curr Osteoporos Rep. 2021;19(3):264-70. doi: 10.1007/s11914-021-00665-z
  13. Hoffer MM, Bullock M. The functional and social significance of orthopedic rehabilitation of mentally retarded patients with cerebral palsy. Orthop Clin North Am. 1981;12(1):185-91.
  14. Novachek TF, Stout JL, Tervo R. Reliability and validity of the Gillette Functional Assessment Questionnaire as an outcome measure in children with walking disabilities. J Pediatr Orthop. 2000;20(1):75-81.
  15. Persiani P, Ranaldi FM, Martini L, et al. Treatment of tibial deformities with the Fassier–Duval telescopic nail and minimally invasive percutaneous osteotomies in patients with osteogenesis imperfecta type III. J Pediatr Orthop. 2019;28(2):179-85.
  16. Spahn KM, Mickel T, Carry PM, et al. Fassier-Duval rods are associated with superior probability of survival compared with static implants in a cohort of children with osteogenesis imperfecta deformities. J Pediatr Orthop. 2019;39(5):e392-6.
  17. Sulko J, Oberc A. Advantages and complications following Fassier-Duval Intramedullary rodding in children. Pilot study. Ortop Traumatol Rehabil. 2015;17(5):523-30.
  18. Sterian A, Balanescu R, Barbilian A, et al. Early telescopic rod osteosynthesis for osteogenesis imperfecta patients. J Med Life. 2015;8(4):544-7.
  19. Musielak BJ, Woźniak Ł, Sułko J, et al. Problems, Complications, and Factors Predisposing to Failure of Fassier-Duval Rodding in Children With Osteogenesis Imperfecta: A Double-center Study. J Pediatr Orthop. 2021;41(4):e347-52. doi: 10.1097/BPO.0000000000001763
  20. Imajima Y, Kitano M, Ueda T. Intramedullary fixation using Kirschner wires in children with osteogenesis imperfecta. J Pediatr Orthop. 2015;35(4):431-4. doi: 10.1097/bpo.0000000000000285
  21. Scollan JP, Jauregui JJ, Jacobsen CM, Abzug JM. The outcomes of nonelongating intramedullary fixation of the lower extremity for pediatric osteogenesis imperfecta patients: A meta-analysis. J Pediatr Orthop. 2017;37(5):e313-6.
  22. Persiani P, Martini L, Ranaldi FM, et al. Elastic intramedullary nailing of the femur fracture in patients affected by osteogenesis imperfecta type 3: indications, limits and pitfalls. Injury. 2019;50(Suppl. 2):S52-6.
  23. Lee K, Park MS, Yoo WJ, et al. Proximal migration of femoral telescopic rod in children with osteogenesis imperfecta. J Pediatr Orthop. 2015;35(2):178-84.
  24. Ruck J, Dahan-Oliel N, Montpetit K, et al. Fassier-Duval femoral rodding in children with Osteogenesis imperfecta receiving bisphosphonates: functional outcomes at one year. J Child Orthop. 2011;5(3):217-24.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
2. Fig. 1. The ratio of complications and metal fixator surgical revisions in group 1B (type III OI, TEN).

Download (48KB)
3. Fig. 2. The ratio of complications and metal fixator surgical revisions in group 2D (type III OI, FD).

Download (44KB)
4. Fig. 3. Median Gillette FAQ score in the four subgroups before the surgery and 20 months after.

Download (59KB)
5. Fig. 4. Comparative assessment of motor activity between study subgroups using the Hoffer–Bullosk scale.

Download (140KB)

Copyright (c) 2023 Consilium Medicum

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия ПИ № ФС 77 - 74329 от 19.11.2018 г.


This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies