In brief
What should readers understand about PRECICE vs. LON: How the Two Most Common Limb Lengthening Methods Compare?
A structured, source-backed comparison of the PRECICE magnetic intramedullary nail and the Lengthening Over Nail (LON) method — covering how each works, what surgery involves, how the distraction process differs, and what recovery typically looks like.
Limits: This page is educational context only and is not medical advice.
- Evidence
- Peer-reviewed evidence
- Source set
- Peer-reviewed sources
- Updated
- References
- 6 listed
Editorial responsibility: Limb Lengthening Library editorial team. Independent medical review is not claimed unless a named reviewer is listed. How sources are reviewed.
Short Answer
Titanium PRECICE IMLL is a fully internal magnetic lengthening nail. LON combines an intramedullary nail with an external fixator during distraction, then locks the nail and removes the frame for consolidation. Neither is universally superior; anatomy, indication, deformity, device fit, load needs, infection exposure, operations, rehabilitation, cost, and provider experience all matter. [1]
PRECICE IMLL
The nail is inserted in the medullary canal and locked proximally and distally at the initial operation. An external controller actuates distraction. There are no external pin sites, but the method still has incision, nerve, joint, regenerate, alignment, infection, implant, load, and reoperation risks.
LON
The frame supplies distraction while the nail is already present. At the transition after distraction, the nail is locked and the frame removed so the nail supports consolidation. Frame duration is shorter than classic external fixation in comparative literature, but pin sites overlap in time with an intramedullary implant and create a route for deep infection. [1][2]
Daily Experience
- PRECICE: controller positioning and prescribed sessions, load restriction, assistive devices, serial imaging, therapy, and incision monitoring.
- LON: frame adjustments, pin-site and frame care, clothing and sleep adaptations, prescribed loading, serial imaging, and therapy.
Third-party video context
This provider-produced animation is useful for visualizing the mechanics of a fully internal magnetic nail and LON. Its statements about method superiority, pain, loading, recovery, infection, and device removal reflect one clinic's perspective and may conflict with current device instructions or regulatory status. Use the written comparison, current FDA information, and the exact device instructions, not the video, as the decision reference.
Load the YouTube player to watch this video.
The player is hosted by YouTube. Open on YouTube if the embed does not load.
Operations and Removal
PRECICE does not require routine distal locking at the end of distraction because both ends are locked initially. LON generally includes a frame-removal and nail-locking transition. Both methods can require unplanned procedures, and internal nails later require device-specific removal planning. FDA instructions for titanium PRECICE IMLL state removal after one year. [3]
Loading Cannot Be Compared With One Number
Permitted load depends on the exact nail or frame, diameter, bone, number of operated limbs, phase, regenerate, alignment, and surgeon. LON may permit different loading because the frame and nail share stability, but earlier or fuller loading is not universal. Use the written plan for the exact construct.
Infection Trade-Off
A fully internal nail avoids pin-site infection but not all surgical or implant infection. LON adds pin sites near an intramedullary implant. A randomized 31-limb study reported shorter frame time and fewer overall events with LON than conventional Ilizarov treatment, while 3 of 15 LON limbs developed deep intramedullary infection. The benefit and harm must be presented together. [4]
Direct Comparison Evidence Is Limited
Comparative studies differ by indication, bone, era, device, surgeon, and outcome definitions. A femoral cohort favoring a magnetic nail over LON does not prove the same result for every tibial or cosmetic patient. Provider-specific current outcomes remain important. [5]
Current U.S. Device Status
The FDA states that stainless-steel Precice devices including STRYDE remain recalled and should not be implanted. A separate Class II recall covers specified PRECICE MAX catalog and lot combinations and remained open when the FDA record was updated on July 14, 2026. Do not treat STRYDE as available. For PRECICE MAX, verify the exact UDI or lot and current instructions rather than assuming that either every unit is recalled or every unit is available for high loading. [3][6]
Cost Depends on the Full Pathway
Implant price alone does not compare total cost. Include facility, frame, controller, operations, pin care, therapy, imaging, housing, lost work, removal, and complications. Published cost studies reflect one system and time and do not establish a current global price.
Ask the Same Questions for Both Methods
- Exact device or construct, fit, load restriction, current regulatory status, and planned operations.
- Provider outcomes for the same segment, indication, and method with clear denominators.
- Infection, joint, nerve, alignment, regenerate, implant, and revision protocols.
- Local stay, remote-care limits, therapy, caregiver, emergency, and total-cost plan.
Sources
Verification policy- Barakat AH et al. - Lengthening Nails for Distraction Osteogenesis: A Review of Current Practice and Presentation of Extended IndicationsAcademic journalAccessed 2026-07-12
- Rozbruch SR et al. - Limb lengthening and then insertion of an intramedullary nail: a case-matched comparisonAcademic journalAccessed 2026-07-12
- U.S. FDA - Update: NuVasive Specialized Orthopedics Precice Devices - Letter to Health Care ProvidersOfficial public sourceAccessed 2026-07-12
Current U.S. indications, weight and implant-count limits, one-year removal instruction, and stainless-steel device recall status.
- El-Husseini TF et al. - Comparison between lengthening over nail and conventional Ilizarov lengthening: a prospective randomized clinical studyAcademic journalAccessed 2026-07-12
- Fragomen AT et al. - A Comparison of Femoral Lengthening Methods Favors the Magnetic Internal Lengthening Nail When Compared with Lengthening Over a NailAcademic journalAccessed 2026-07-12
- U.S. FDA - Class 2 Device Recall: Precice Max (Z-0500-2025)Official public sourceAccessed 2026-07-12
Recall initiated September 30, 2024. The FDA record was open when reviewed on July 12, 2026.
Informational only. Not medical advice.