The Management of Tibial Bone Defects: A Multicenter Experience of Hexapod and Ilizarov Frames

• Published in: Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews Vol. 7; no. 8
• Main Authors: Sheridan, Gerard A, Pang, Aaron, Page, Brian J, Greenstein, Michael D, Cardoso, Gracielle S, Amorim, Renato, Rozbruch, S Robert, Fragomen, Austin T
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Wolters Kluwer 01.08.2023
• ISSN: 2474-7661; 2474-7661
• DOI: 10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-23-00033

Bone defects may be managed with bone transport or acute shortening and lengthening using circular external fixation devices. We performed a multicenter retrospective cohort study to compare the outcomes between the Ilizarov frames and hexapod frames for the management of bone defects. Patients treated for bone defects using either Ilizarov or hexapod frames were included for analysis in two specialist institutions. Primary outcomes were time to consolidation, bone healing index (BHI), and external fixator index (EFI). Radiographic parameters included the medial proximal tibial angle, lateral distal tibial angle, posterior proximal tibial angle, and anterior distal tibial angle. There were 137 hexapods and 90 Ilizarov frames in total. The mean time to follow-up was 3.7 years in the hexapod group and 4.0 years in the Ilizarov group. Hexapods had a significantly lower time to consolidation (253 days versus 449 days) (P < 0.0001) and BHI (59.1 days/cm versus 87.5 days/cm) (P < 0.0001). Hexapods had a significantly better EFI (72.3 days/cm versus 96.1 days/cm) (P = 0.0009). Hexapods may confer a significant advantage over Ilizarov frames in the management of bone defects. Time to consolidation, radiographic parameters, BHI, and EFI are all superior in hexapods.