Humeral lengthening: Case report

Introduction. Difference in length of upper extremities has mainly esthetic significance and is therefore not so often a subject of operative treatment, compared to lower extremities. Case Outline. We are presenting a case of a 16­year­old patient in whom a shortening of 9 cm of the right humerus...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Gajdobranski Đorđe, Marić Dušan, Mikov Aleksandra
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Serbian Medical Society 2013-01-01
Series:Srpski Arhiv za Celokupno Lekarstvo
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/0370-8179/2013/0370-81791308536G.pdf
id doaj-77dcc3861a4945cd91a80753b86f1414
record_format Article
spelling doaj-77dcc3861a4945cd91a80753b86f14142021-01-02T11:57:49ZengSerbian Medical SocietySrpski Arhiv za Celokupno Lekarstvo0370-81792013-01-011417-853654110.2298/SARH1308536GHumeral lengthening: Case reportGajdobranski ĐorđeMarić DušanMikov AleksandraIntroduction. Difference in length of upper extremities has mainly esthetic significance and is therefore not so often a subject of operative treatment, compared to lower extremities. Case Outline. We are presenting a case of a 16­year­old patient in whom a shortening of 9 cm of the right humerus was determined at the end of growth. This shortening was the result of surgical treatment of solitary bone cyst at the proximal end of the humerus done at the age of 10 years. In order to correct the length of the humerus we applied distraction osteogenesis with a compressive­distracting device according to Mitkovic (Traffix), and we achieved the lengthening of 7.5 cm. During the period of distraction we encountered the following complications: minimal suppuration at the site of the wedges that was successfully resolved with intensive local treatment, while pain and paresthesias along the N. radialis were resolved with a temporarily slowing of the distraction process. Fixation with a plate, i.e. bone grafting was not necessary, and final functional and esthetic result was excellent. Conclusion. Successful lengthening of the shortened humerus can be achieved with a unilateral compressive­distracting device according to Mitkovic as its application up to a complete bone reconstruction does not require additional plate fixation or bone grafting. The patient was capable of performing usual daily activities during application of the device.http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/0370-8179/2013/0370-81791308536G.pdfhumerusbone lengtheningexternal fixatorchild
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Gajdobranski Đorđe
Marić Dušan
Mikov Aleksandra
spellingShingle Gajdobranski Đorđe
Marić Dušan
Mikov Aleksandra
Humeral lengthening: Case report
Srpski Arhiv za Celokupno Lekarstvo
humerus
bone lengthening
external fixator
child
author_facet Gajdobranski Đorđe
Marić Dušan
Mikov Aleksandra
author_sort Gajdobranski Đorđe
title Humeral lengthening: Case report
title_short Humeral lengthening: Case report
title_full Humeral lengthening: Case report
title_fullStr Humeral lengthening: Case report
title_full_unstemmed Humeral lengthening: Case report
title_sort humeral lengthening: case report
publisher Serbian Medical Society
series Srpski Arhiv za Celokupno Lekarstvo
issn 0370-8179
publishDate 2013-01-01
description Introduction. Difference in length of upper extremities has mainly esthetic significance and is therefore not so often a subject of operative treatment, compared to lower extremities. Case Outline. We are presenting a case of a 16­year­old patient in whom a shortening of 9 cm of the right humerus was determined at the end of growth. This shortening was the result of surgical treatment of solitary bone cyst at the proximal end of the humerus done at the age of 10 years. In order to correct the length of the humerus we applied distraction osteogenesis with a compressive­distracting device according to Mitkovic (Traffix), and we achieved the lengthening of 7.5 cm. During the period of distraction we encountered the following complications: minimal suppuration at the site of the wedges that was successfully resolved with intensive local treatment, while pain and paresthesias along the N. radialis were resolved with a temporarily slowing of the distraction process. Fixation with a plate, i.e. bone grafting was not necessary, and final functional and esthetic result was excellent. Conclusion. Successful lengthening of the shortened humerus can be achieved with a unilateral compressive­distracting device according to Mitkovic as its application up to a complete bone reconstruction does not require additional plate fixation or bone grafting. The patient was capable of performing usual daily activities during application of the device.
topic humerus
bone lengthening
external fixator
child
url http://www.doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/0370-8179/2013/0370-81791308536G.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT gajdobranskiđorđe humerallengtheningcasereport
AT maricdusan humerallengtheningcasereport
AT mikovaleksandra humerallengtheningcasereport
_version_ 1724354676900495360