Outpatient limb lengthening using magnetic intramedullary nails: A single Institution's experience

Introduction: The advantages of outpatient surgery have been shown in other orthopedic subspecialities to be a means of driving down costs and reducing the average length of hospital stay. However, there is a scarcity of literature examining the utility of a specific, hospital-based facility performing such procedures for limb lengthening. Considering this, we aimed to investigate surgical factors, patient characteristics, and the incidence of outpatient postoperative complications for patients undergoing surgery and subsequent distraction osteogenesis utilizing the Precice® nail, a state-of-the-art magnetic intramedullary nail (MILN).

Methods: We performed a retrospective review of medical records pertaining to outpatient limb lengthening procedures occurring between January 2012 and September 2023 at a single institution, as performed by three surgeons. Variables of interest included baseline demographics, type of anesthesia, operative bone, laterality, preoperative diagnosis, osteotomy level, procedure performed, prosthesis, point of entry, nail diameter/length, goal length, goal achieved, postoperative complications, and elective nail removal.

Results: The cohort comprised 20 limbs, with an average age at index surgery of 24.8 (SD 7.96). There were no complications related to the outpatient nature of the procedure. Five of the 20 limbs had postoperative complications, including deep vein thrombosis (DVT), screw backout, and nail breakage.

Conclusion: Our initial investigation of outpatient limb lengthening at a specific, hospital-based facility demonstrated favorable postoperative outcomes for those patients undergoing limb lengthening procedures with an MILN. The field would certainly benefit from future research assessing outcomes of pediatric surgeries in the outpatient setting on a larger scale, as well as across hospital systems, the country, and globally. With the proven advances and benefits of MILNs, prioritizing examination of their efficacy in an outpatient population is imperative. Furthermore, the success of outpatient procedures in other orthopedic subspecialities, such as total joint arthroplasty, is a logical, driving precedent for this rationale.