Mechanical evaluation of external fixators used in limb lengthening

Four external fixator systems (five configurations) used for limb lengthening were tested to determine the fixator stiffness and the fracture gap rigidity. There was a statistical difference between fixators in all modes of loading with respect to stiffness, shear, and axial motion. The fixators were graded to determine their relative stiffness, shear rigidity, and axial rigidity. The EBI Orthofix proved to be the most rigid fixator relative to the configurations tested with minimal shear or axial motion at the fracture site. The Ilizarov tibial configuration was the least rigid, demonstrating more shear and axial motion at the fracture gap. The Ilizarov femoral system combined excellent stability and shear resistance with preservation of axial dynamization. Fixators with a high stiffness provide less motion at the fracture site, which may cause stress shielding of the osteotomy. Fixators that provide more motion at the fracture gap are less stable. These data may be useful in determining which fixator may be ideal for a particular clinical situation.     

A comparative evaluation of the time to frame removal for tibia fractures treated with hexapod and Ilizarov circular frames

IntroductionTraditional Ilizarov and hexapod frames have different biomechanical properties and there is limited literature regarding their effect on time to fracture union or time to frame removal.MethodsTibial fractures managed with a circular frame at a tertiary limb reconstruction referral centre between 2011 and 2018 were retrospectively identified from a prospectively maintained database. They were classified into three treatment groups; Ilizarov style, Taylor Spatial Frame (TSF) and TrueLok Hex (TL-Hex). Data were extracted from electronic patient records and digital radiographs. The primary outcome was time to frame removal, which was seen as an indicator of clinical and radiological fracture union. Odds ratios were calculated with the clinical significance set at 30 days.Results274 patients (median age 49 years, 36% female) were included in the analysis. 8.4% Ilizarov, 10.5% TSF and 13.5% TL-Hex frames required further surgery to aid fracture healing (p = 0.38). 30% of patients had open fractures. Median time to removal for Ilizarov, TSF & TL Hex frames was 167, 198 and 185 days respectively. There was a significant difference between Ilizarov and hexapod frames. Both TSF (OR 2.2, p<0.003) and TL-Hex (OR 1.8, p<0.04) had a significantly increased time to removal of 30 days or more compared with Ilizarov frames.The time to frame removal in metaphyseal fractures was significantly shorter for Ilizarov frame fixation than hexapod frames (p = 0.04). Open fractures were significantly more likely to require at least 30 days extra time to removal than closed fractures (OR 3.3, p<0.001). There was no significant difference in the time to frame removal between fracture location, age or sex.ConclusionIlizarov frames have demonstrated a reduced time to frame removal in the management of tibial fractures than hexapod frames. Differences in the time to frame removal, an indicator of time to fracture union, may be due to the different mechanical properties of the frame, or early disruption of the fracture haematoma through secondary frame manipulation and fracture reduction, increased proportion of metaphyseal fractures treated with Ilizarov, or patient selection. The healing time was comparable across the tibia. Pooled meta-analyses may be able to further quantify these associations.     

Fracture healing following high energy tibial trauma: Ilizarov versus Taylor Spatial Frame

Introduction

The optimal treatment of high energy tibial fractures remains controversial and a challenging orthopaedic problem. The role of external fixators for all these tibial fractures has been shown to be crucial.

Methods

A five-year consecutive series was reviewed retrospectively, identifying two treatment groups: Ilizarov and Taylor Spatial Frame (TSF; Smith & Nephew, Memphis, TN, US). Fracture healing time was the primary outcome measure.

Results

A total of 112 patients (85 Ilizarov, 37 TSF) were identified for the review with a mean age of 45 years. This was higher in women (57 years) than in men (41 years). There was no significant difference between frame types (p=0.83). The median healing time was 163 days in both groups. There was no significant difference in healing time between smokers and non-smokers (180 vs 165 days respectively, p=0.07), open or closed fractures (p=0.13) or age and healing time (Spearman''s r=0.12, p=0.18). There was no incidence of non-union or re-fracture following frame removal in either group.

Conclusions

Despite the assumption of the rigid construct of the TSF, the median time to union was similar to that of the Ilizarov frame and the TSF therefore can play a significant role in complex tibial fractures.     

Ilizarov技术联合皮瓣即时扩张技术Ⅰ期矫正合并皮肤挛缩的胫骨成角畸形

目的:探讨采用Ilizarov技术联合皮瓣即时扩张技术Ⅰ期矫正合并皮肤挛缩的胫骨成角畸形的临床疗效及安全性。方法:自2010年1月至2015年1月,采用Ilizarov外固定技术联合挛缩侧皮肤术中即时扩张技术Ⅰ期矫正合并皮肤挛缩的胫骨成角畸形患者30例,男21例,女9例;年龄25~60岁,平均(40.2±5.5)岁。定期复查X线片,去除Ilizarov外固定后采用美国特种外科医院(HSS)评分标准评定膝关节功能,并采用疼痛视觉模拟评分(VAS)评价其疼痛缓解程度。结果:术后所有患者获随访,时间6~35个月,平均22个月。其中29例患者切口均Ⅰ期愈合,1例患者出现切口感染并发骨髓炎,2例患者并发固定钉松动,扩张皮瓣区均无坏死,无神经血管牵拉损伤症状。术后4~7个月去除外固定架,平均(5.2±1.1)个月。矫正成角角度10°~35°,平均(25.5±3.5)°。术后根据HSS评分标准,总分92.5±6.6,其中优25例,良4例,中1例;VAS评分1.2±1.5。结论:采用Ilizarov技术联合皮瓣即时扩张技术能够Ⅰ期矫正合并皮肤挛缩的胫骨成角畸形,带架时间短,无皮肤坏死及神经症状,能够早期负重锻炼并改善患肢功能。     

What Are the Biomechanical Properties of the Taylor Spatial Frame™?

Background

The Taylor Spatial Frame™ (TSF) is a versatile variant of the traditional Ilizarov circular fixator. Although in widespread use, little comparative data exist to quantify the biomechanical effect of substituting the tried-and-tested Ilizarov construct for the TSF hexapod system.

Questions/purposes

This study was designed to investigate the mechanical properties of the TSF system under physiologic loads, with and without the addition of a simulated bone model, with comparison to the standard Ilizarov frame.

Methods

The mechanical behaviors of three identical four-ring TSF and Ilizarov constructs were tested under levels of axial compression, bending, and rotational torque to simulate loading during normal gait. An acrylic-pipe fracture model subsequently was mounted, using fine wires and 5 mm half pins, and the testing was repeated. Load-deformation curves, and so rigidity, for each construct were calculated, with statistical comparisons performed using paired t-tests.

Results

Under axial loading, the TSF was found to be less rigid than the Ilizarov frame (645 ± 57 N/mm versus 1269 ± 256 N/mm; mean difference, 623 N/mm; 95% CI, 438.3–808.5 N/mm; p < 0.001), but more rigid under bending and torsional loads (bending: 42 ± 9 Nm/degree versus 78 ± 13 Nm/degree; mean difference, 37 Nm/degree; 95% CI, 25.0–47.9 Nm/degree; p < 0.001; torsion: 16 ± 2 Nm/degree versus 5 ± 0.35 Nm/degree; mean difference, 11 Nm/degree; 95% CI, 9.5–12.2 Nm/degree; p < 0.001). On mounting the bone models, these relationships broadly remained in the half-pin and fine-wire groups, however the half-pin constructs were universally more rigid than those using fine wires. This effect resulted in the TSF, using half pins, showing no difference in axial rigidity to the fine-wire Ilizarov (107 ± 3 N/mm versus 107 ± 4 N/mm; mean difference, 0.05 N/mm; 95% CI, −6.99 to 7.1 N/mm; p > 0.999), while retaining greater bending and torsional rigidity. Throughout testing, a small amount of laxity was observed in the TSF construct on either side of neutral loading, amounting to 0.72 mm (±0.37 mm) for a change in loading between −10 N and 10 N axial load, and which persisted with the addition of the synthetic fracture model.

Conclusions

This study broadly shows the TSF construct to generate lower axial rigidity, but greater bending and torsional rigidity, when compared with the Ilizarov frame, under physiologic loads. The anecdotally described laxity in the TSF hexapod strut system was shown in vitro, but only at low levels of loading around neutral. It also was shown that the increased stiffness generated by use of half pins produced a TSF construct replicating the axial rigidity of a fine-wire Ilizarov frame, for which much evidence of good clinical and radiologic outcomes exist, while providing greater rigidity and so improved resistance to potentially detrimental bending and rotational shear loads.

Clinical Relevance

If replicated in the clinical setting, these findings suggest that when using the TSF, care should be taken to minimize the observed laxity around neutral with appropriate preloading of the construct, but that its use may produce constructs better able to resist bending and torsional loading, although with lower axial rigidity. Use of half pins in a TSF construct however may replicate the axial mechanical behavior of an Ilizarov construct, which is thought to be conducive to bone healing.

     

The Relation between the Dynamization of Hexapod Circular External Fixator and Tibial Mechanical Properties

Objective

Dynamization of the external fixator, defined as gradually decreasing construct-stability of the fixator, is widely accepted as a method for treatment during the late phase of the bone healing process. However, the dynamization is mostly based on the subjective experience of orthopaedists at present, without unified standards and a clear theoretical basis. The objective of the study is to investigate the influence of the dynamization operations on the tibial mechanical properties with a hexapod circular external fixator and standardize the dynamization process.

Methods

A 3D-printed tibial defects model with Young's modulus of 10.5 GPa and Poisson's ratio of 0.32 simulated the clinically fractured bone. A 10 × ∅ 45 mm silicone sample with Young's modulus of 2.7 MPa and Poisson's ratio of 0.32 simulated the callus in the fracture site. Furthermore, a hexapod circular external fixator whose struts were coded from #1 to #6 was fixed on the model with six half-pins (5 mm diameter). Corresponding to the action of removing and loosening the struts, 17 dynamization operations are designed. For each construct after different dynamization operations, the mechanical environment changes in the fracture site were recorded by a triaxle forces sensor under gradually increasing external load from 0 to 500 N.

Results

The results show that the bone axial load-sharing ratio of each construct in the removal group was generally higher than that in the loosening group. The ratio increased from 92.51 ± 0.74% to 102.68 ± 0.27% with the number of operated struts rising from 2 to 6. Besides, the constructions with the same number of operated struts but with different strut codes such as constructions 3–5, had similar bone axial load-sharing ratios. In addition, the proposed dynamization method of the hexapod circular external fixator can gradually increase the bone axial load-sharing ratio from 90.73 ± 0.19% to 102.68 ± 0.27% and maintain the bone radial load-sharing ratio below 8%.

Conclusion

The laboratory study verified the effects of the type of operations and the number of operated struts on the bone axial load-sharing ratio, as well as the slight influence of the choice of the strut code. Besides, a dynamization method of the hexapod circular external fixator was proposed to increase the bone axial load-sharing ratio gradually.     

Treatment of open tibial fractures with the Orthofix fixator

External fixation is considered the treatment of choice for severe open tibial fractures. A prospective study was designed to evaluate the use of the Orthofix Dynamic Axial Fixator (DAF) for the short- and long-term treatment of open tibial fractures. Forty-four patients with 45 open tibial fractures were enrolled in the study, which included a one-year follow-up period. Eighty-nine percent of the fractures were classified as Gustilo and Anderson's Type III. All fractures except one were united in a mean healing time of 22.6 weeks. The dynamization of the Orthofix in nonsegmental fractures occurred at an average of 8.1 weeks. Segmental fractures received a two-stage dynamization. The first stage consisted of removing the supplementary pins, once callus formation was seen at one of the fractures lines, plus the addition of a bone graft. This stage occurred at an average of 8.8 weeks. The second stage consisted of unlocking the telescoping rods and allowing dynamic axial loading of the consolidating graft. This stage occurred at an average of 19.0 weeks. The implementation of this one-plane unilateral frame, which is capable of converting from a rigid to a dynamic fixator, combined with a bone graft in 58% of the patients, contributed to a 98% success rate. Proper timing of dynamization is emphasized to avoid angulation, nonunion, or delayed union.     

Correction of tibial malunion and nonunion with six-axis analysis deformity correction using the Taylor Spatial Frame

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of six-axis analysis deformity correction using the Taylor Spatial Frame for the treatment of posttraumatic tibial malunions and nonunions. DESIGN: Retrospectively reviewed, consecutive series. Mean duration of follow-up was 3.2 years (range 2-4.2 years). SETTING: Tertiary referral center for deformity correction. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Eighteen patients were included in the study (11 malunions and 7 nonunions). All deformities were posttraumatic in nature. The mean number of operations before the application of the spatial frame was 2.6 (range 1-6 operations). All patients completed the study. INTERVENTION: Six-axis analysis deformity correction using the Taylor Spatial Frame (Smith & Nephew, Memphis, TN) was used for correction of posttraumatic tibial malunion or nonunion. Nine patients had bone grafting at the time of frame application. One patient with a tibial plafond fracture simultaneously had deformity correction and an ankle fusion for a mobile atrophic nonunion. Two patients had infected tibial nonunions that were treated with multiple débridements, antibiotic beads, and bone grafting at the time of spatial frame application. A rotational gastrocnemius flap was used to cover a proximal third tibial defect in one patient. The average length of time the spatial frame was worn, time to healing, was 18.5 weeks (range 12-32 weeks). MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Assessment of deformity correction in six axes, knee and ankle range of motion, incidence of infection, and return to preinjury activities. RESULTS: Of the 18 patients treated with the Taylor Spatial Frame, with adjunctive bone graft as necessary, 17 achieved union and significant correction of their deformities in six axes (ie, coronal angulation and translation, sagittal angulation and translation, rotation, and shortening). Fifteen patients returned to their preinjury activities at last follow-up. CONCLUSION: Six-axis analysis deformity correction using the Taylor Spatial Frame is an effective technique to treat posttraumatic malunions and nonunions of the tibia, with several advantages over previously used devices.     

A biomechanical analysis of the Ilizarov external fixator

Five configurations of the Ilizarov fixator were analyzed in vitro. The overall stiffness, shear stiffness, and axial motion of the fracture site were determined. The data were compared with the results of eight conventional one-half frame fixators previously tested in the same manner. The Ilizarov fixator allowed significantly more axial motion at the fracture site during axial compression than the other fixators tested. The overall stiffness and shear rigidity of the Ilizarov external fixator were similar to those of the one-half pin fixators in bending and torsion. The stability of the Ilizarov fixator was a function of bone position within the fixator rings and fixation wire tension. The use of olive stop wires increased the shear resistance of the Ilizarov system.     

Dynamic locking plates provide symmetric axial dynamization to stimulate fracture healing

Axial dynamization of an osteosynthesis construct can promote fracture healing. This biomechanical study evaluated a novel dynamic locking plate that derives symmetric axial dynamization by elastic suspension of locking holes within the plate. Standard locked and dynamic plating constructs were tested in a diaphyseal bridge‐plating model of the femoral diaphysis to determine the amount and symmetry of interfragmentary motion under axial loading, and to assess construct stiffness under axial loading, torsion, and bending. Subsequently, constructs were loaded until failure to determine construct strength and failure modes. Finally, strength tests were repeated in osteoporotic bone surrogates. One body‐weight axial loading of standard locked constructs produced asymmetric interfragmentary motion that was over three times smaller at the near cortex (0.1 ± 0.01 mm) than at the far cortex (0.32 ± 0.02 mm). Compared to standard locked constructs, dynamic plating constructs enhanced motion by 0.32 mm at the near cortex and by 0.33 mm at the far cortex and yielded a 77% lower axial stiffness (p < 0.001). Dynamic plating constructs were at least as strong as standard locked constructs under all test conditions. In conclusion, dynamic locking plates symmetrically enhance interfragmentary motion, deliver controlled axial dynamization, and are at least comparable in strength to standard locked constructs. © 2015 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 33:1218–1225, 2015.     

Management of post-traumatic bone defects of the tibia using vascularised fibular graft combined with Ilizarov external fixator

IntroductionPost-traumatic bone defects of the tibia present a difficult reconstructive challenge. Various methods of reconstruction are available, such as allografts, vascularised fibular graft (either free or pedicled) and bone transport technique.Patients and methodsFourteen patients with an average age of 34.1 years at operation (range, 12–65) with post-traumatic bony defects of the tibia were selected for reconstruction with vascularised fibular graft combined with Ilizarov external fixation. There were 12 male and two female. The size of the bony gap was 10.4 cm (range, 7–13) and the average length of the fibula used was 16.4 cm (range, 14–21).ResultsThe mean follow up period was 20.4 months (range, 10–37). All patients had bony union at both proximal and distal ends of the fibula primarily except one patient that required secondary iliac bone graft at the distal end of the fibula to obtain union. The average time for bone healing was 3.9 months (range, 3–9). The average time spent in Ilizarov frame was 5.9 months (range, 5–11). Unprotected full weight-bearing was achieved within an average of 7.3 months (range, 6–12).ConclusionVascularised fibular bone graft combined with an Ilizarov frame is a successful approach to safely and effectively reconstruct bone defects of the tibia. It has the advantages of vascularised fibular bone grafts together with the biomechanical advantages of Ilizarov frame that allows weight bearing to start almost immediately after surgery. This leads to a good outcome regarding the union and function.     

Pediatric and adolescent applications of the Taylor Spatial Frame

Limb deformity can occur in the pediatric and adolescent populations from multiple etiologies: congenital, traumatic, posttraumatic sequelae, oncologic, and infection. Correcting these deformities is important for many reasons. Ilizarov popularized external fixation to accomplish this task. Taylor expanded on this by designing an external fixator in 1994 with 6 telescoping struts that can be sequentially manipulated to achieve multiaxial correction of deformity without the need for hinges or operative frame alterations. This frame can be used to correct deformities in children and has shown good anatomic correction with minimal morbidity. The nature of the construct and length of treatment affects psychosocial factors that the surgeon and family must be aware of prior to treatment. An understanding of applications of the Taylor Spatial Frame gives orthopedic surgeons an extra tool to correct simple and complex deformities in pediatric and adolescent patients.     

Biomechanics of the Ilizarov fixator for fracture fixation.

Compression, distraction, and torsion stiffness of the Ilizarov external fixator was measured in two fracture models in autopsy specimens of tibia and fibula. A transverse model was tested in six frame constructions with the osteotomy site preloaded in four different positions. An oblique model was tested in four frame constructions also with four preloaded positions. Stiffness was more dependent on bone preload than wire number, wire type, or frame design. High stiffness was achieved by bone preloading, by compressing the rings together, by increasing the number of wires, and by using olive wires. The stiffness can be decreased (dynamization) by separating the rings and by removing wires. This data is helpful for frame design of the Ilizarov fixator.     

Taylor spatial frame-software-controlled fixator for deformity correction-the early Indian experience

Background:

Complex deformity correction and fracture treatment with the Ilizarov method needs extensive preoperative analysis and laborious postoperative fixator alterations, which are error-prone. We report our initial experience in treating the first 22 patients having fractures and complex deformities and shortening with software-controlled Taylor spatial frame (TSF) external fixator, for its ease of use and accuracy in achieving fracture reduction and complex deformity correction.

Settings and Design:

The struts of the TSF fixator have multiplane hinges at both ends and the six struts allow correction in all six axes. Hence the same struts act to correct either angulation or translation or rotation. With a single construct assembled during surgery all the desired axis corrections can be performed without a change of the montage as is needed with the Ilizarov fixator.

Materials and Methods:

Twenty-seven limb segments were operated with the TSF fixator. There were 23 tibiae, two femora, one knee joint and one ankle joint. Seven patients had comminuted fractures. Ten patients who had 13 deformed segments achieved full correction. Eight patients had lengthening in 10 tibiae. (Five of these also had simultaneous correction of deformities). One patient each had correction of knee and ankle deformities. Accurate reduction of fractures and correction of deformities and length could be achieved in all of our patients with minimum postoperative fixator alterations as compared to the Ilizarov system. The X-ray visualization of the osteotomy or lengthening site due to the six crossing struts and added bulk of the fixator rings which made positioning in bed and walking slightly more difficult as compared to the Ilizarov fixator.

Conclusions:

The TSF external fixator allows accurate fracture reduction and deformity correction without tedious analysis and postoperative frame alterations. The high cost of the fixator is a deterrent. The need for an internet connection and special X-rays to operate the fixator add to its complexity.     

Stabile Ringfixateurmontage beim Segmenttransport

The stability of bone fragments within the Ilizarov external frame has a substantial effect on regenerate bone healing. The biomechanical performance of the frame is affected not only by manipulation of the different fixation parameters (rings, struts, wires, half pins) but also by the mode of loading and the patient??s ability of weight bearing. Because frame stability depends on complex interactions of the different frame components small modifications may have a substantial influence on interfragmentary movements within the regenerate and at the docking site. Manipulation of the different fixation components specifically to control the frame stability requires a precise understanding of the biomechanical principles of the external ring fixator. This article focuses on the biomechanical influence of the different fixation parameters as well as the mode of mechanical loading and common mechanical problems and complications.     

Distraction of hypertrophic nonunion of tibia with deformity using Ilizarov/Taylor Spatial Frame

Two cases of hypertrophic nonunion of the tibia with deformity for which distraction treatment using an Ilizarov/Taylor Spatial Frame (Smith & Nephew, Memphis, TN) are presented. This frame utilizes a computer program to help plan correction of the deformity.     

A Novel technique of three-ring Ilizarov fixator frame in gap non-union of tibia

IntroductionGap non-union of tibia occurring mostly after trauma and many times complicated by infection, is a difficult problem to treat. The study aimed to assess the outcome of the three-ring construct of the Ilizarov fixator frame in the management of gap non-union of the tibia.MethodsThis retrospective study included 30 patients of gap non-union of tibia operated from April 2016 to March 2019 with a three-ring Ilizarov fixator frame and follow-up done till March 2021. The mean age was 39.27 (range 10–66) years. The results were assessed by the Association for the Study and Application of the Method of Ilizarov (ASAMI) criteria. MPTA, PPTA, and LDTA after removal of the frame were also measured.ResultsOut of the total 30 cases, all the patients showed complete union. The Ilizarov fixator was kept for an average period of 11.43 months and the mean defect size was 7.17 (range 2–12) cm. All patients were followed up for an average period of 39.36 (range 24–54) months. According to the ASAMI score bone/radiological results, 27 were classified as excellent, 2 as good, and 1 as poor. Functionally 28 were graded as excellent and the remainder as good. The normal ranges of MPTA, LDTA & PPTA were also achieved in a majority (80%) of patients.ConclusionOur results after using only a three-ring Ilizarov fixator frame are almost equivalent to earlier studies and have advantages such as less weight, better patient compliance, superior radiographic visualization, easy mobilization, and reduced costs. Ilizarov ring fixator remains an excellent treatment modality for tibial non-union with a defect, regarding bone union, deformity correction, infection eradication, limb-length achievement, and limb function.     

Effect of early axial dynamization on tibial bone healing: a study in dogs.

Early axial dynamization and its effect on experimental tibial bone healing was compared with healing under rigid fixation in a time-sequenced manner using dogs. An external fixator that could be rigidly locked or set to allow free axial movement while preventing bending and shear was used. Both tibias were osteotomized and externally fixed, leaving a gap between bone ends of 2 mm. At 1 week, one side was dynamized, whereas the other side was kept rigidly locked as a control. Dogs were euthanized at 1 day and 1, 3, 5, 8, and 11 weeks after dynamization. The outcome measures were static and dynamic load-bearing, periosteal callus development, new bone formation, callus tissue composition, and mechanical strength. Load bearing was higher on the dynamized limbs during standing for the first 5 weeks and during gait for the first 3 weeks after dynamization compared with the controls. Maximum periosteal callus size was reached faster and was distributed more symmetrically on the dynamized side. The periosteal callus area decreased at 12 weeks on the dynamized sides, but there was no significant change in the area on the control sides. Endosteal new bone formation and bone density decreased between 9 and 12 weeks only on the dynamized sides. The dynamized side showed a significantly higher torsional stiffness at 6 weeks than did the controls. There were no significant differences between dynamized and control tibias at other times. Maximum torque also tended to be higher on the dynamized sides at the same time. Early axial dynamization appeared to accelerate callus formation and remodeling and to provide higher mechanical stiffness during early stages of bone healing.     

Closed Tibial shaft fractures treated with the Ilizarov method: A ten year case series

ObjectivesTo review the outcomes of patients treated with the Ilizarov method for an isolated, closed, simple diaphyseal, Tibial fracture at our institution over the last decade.MethodsThe Ilizarov frame database was used to identify 76 skeletally mature patients who sustained an isolated, closed, extra-articular, simple, diaphyseal Tibial fracture; the injury also known as a “nail-able Tibial fracture.”ResultsThe average age of the patient was 38 (17–70). All 76 patients progressed to union. The average time until union was 148 (55–398) days. The coronal and sagittal alignment was 3° (0−17°) and 4° (0−14°) respectively. No patient suffered from compartment syndrome. No patient developed septic arthritis. No patient had documented anterior knee pain or secondary knee specialist input post frame removal.On average, there were 9(4–29) follow up appointments and 10(5–26) radiographs post frame application.There is a 59% chance of a patient having a difficulty post frame application.The malunion rate was 5%.Persisting pinsite infection post frame removal occurred in 5 patients (6.5%).Drilling of the pinsite sequestrum resolved the infection in four of these patients, giving a deep infection rate of 1.3%.ConclusionsThe Ilizarov method has a role to play in the treatment of simple closed Tibial shaft fractures in patients who need to kneel. Patient education is a priority however; the patient must be made aware of the difficulty rate associated with the Ilizarov method when compared to the complication profile of alternative treatments.