Open AccessCost Comparison of Tibial Distraction Osteogenesis Using External Lengthening and Then Nailing vs Internal Magnetic Lengthening Nails
Author(s) -
Aleksey Dvorzhinskiy,
David T. Zhang,
Austin T. Fragomen,
S. Robert Rozbruch
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
strategies in trauma and limb reconstruction/strategies in trauma and limb reconstruction
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.5
H-Index - 24
eISSN - 1828-8936
pISSN - 1828-8928
DOI - 10.5005/jp-journals-10080-1513
Subject(s) - medicine , external fixation , orthopedic surgery , surgery , distraction osteogenesis , intramedullary rod , cost analysis , distraction , external fixator , engineering , reliability engineering , biology , neuroscience
Tibial lengthening can be performed by distraction osteogenesis via lengthening and then nailing (LATN) or by using a magnetic lengthening nail (MLN). MLN avoids the complications of external fixation while providing accurate and easily controlled lengthening. Concerns exist still regarding the high upfront cost of the magnetic nail, which serves to limit its use in resource-poor areas and decrease adoption among cost-conscious surgeons. The purpose of this study was to compare the hospital, surgeon, and total cost between LATN and MLN when used for tibial lengthening.