Journals / Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica / 2005 / Cilt: 39 - Sayı: 4

Nonvascularized fibular grafts in the reconstruction of bone defects in orthopedic oncology

Ortopedik onkolojide kemik defektlerinin onarımında vaskülarize olmayan fibula greftleri

Pages
300–306
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: Reconstruction of cavitary and segmental bone defects with autogenous or allogenous nonvascularized fibular grafts is a reliable method, with high success rates.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: Bone defects after resection or curettage of musculoskeletal tumors are commonly reconstructed with the use of structural fibular autografts or allografts with considerable success.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: Fifty-seven patients (30 males, 27 females; mean age 22.8 years; range 5 to 57 years) underwent reconstruction with a structural fibular autograft (n=30) or allograft (n=27) following tumor resection.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Reconstruction of cavitary and segmental bone defects with autogenous or allogenous nonvascularized fibular grafts is a reliable method, with high success rates.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Nakil · homolog · Küretaj

Abstract

Objectives: Bone defects after resection or curettage of musculoskeletal tumors are commonly reconstructed with the use of structural fibular autografts or allografts with considerable success. In this study, we compared the clinical and radiographic results of nonvascularized autografts and allografts. Methods: Fifty-seven patients (30 males, 27 females; mean age 22.8 years; range 5 to 57 years) underwent reconstruction with a structural fibular autograft (n=30) or allograft (n=27) following tumor resection. Of the tumor defects, 24 were segmental and 33 were cavitary. All the patients who had segmental reconstruction were treated with internal fixation, except for one patient who had internal fixation and monolateral external fixator for femoral reconstruction. The results were evaluated with respect to union, time to union, and complications. The mean follow-up period was 46 months; 48.4 and 42.3 months in the allograft and autograft groups, respectively). Results: Radiographically, union was obtained in 46 patients (80.7%) within a mean of 5.9 months (6.8 months in 20 autografts, and 5.1 months in 26 allografts). Nonunion (19.3%) occurred in four allografts and seven autografts. No significant difference was found between the two fibular grafts in terms of union (p>0.05). Graft rupture was detected in six patients (5 autografts, 1 allograft) all of which were due to minor traumas. Complications were encountered in eight patients (14%) including transient peroneal nerve injury (n=3), wrist subluxation (n=2), infection (n=2), and Madelung’s deformity. Conclusion: Reconstruction of cavitary and segmental bone defects with autogenous or allogenous nonvascularized fibular grafts is a reliable method, with high success rates.

Özet

Amaç: Ortopedik onkolojide tümör rezeksiyonu veya küretajı sonrası meydana gelen kemik defektlerinin yapısal fibula grefti ile rekonstrüksiyonu sık kullanılan ve başarılı bir yöntemdir. Bu çalışmada vaskülarize olmayan otogreft ve allogreftlerin klinik ve radyografik sonuçları karşılaştırıldı. Çalışma planı: Çalışmaya, tümör rezeksiyonu sonrası fibula allogrefti veya otogrefti kullanılarak rekonstrüksiyon yapılan 57 hasta (30 erkek, 27 kadın; ort. yaş 22.8; dağılım 5-57) alındı. Yirmi yedi hastada allogreft, 30 hastada otogreft kullanıldı. Defektlerin 24’ü segmenter, 33’ü kaviter idi. Segmenter rekonstrüksiyonlarda, hastaların biri dışında tamamına internal fiksasyon yapıldı. Femur rekonstrüksiyonu yapılan bir olguda internal fiksasyona ek olarak monolateral eksternal fiksatör uygulandı. Hastalar kaynama ve süresi ve komplikasyonlar açısından de- ğerlendirildi. Ortalama izlem süresi 46 aydı; allogreft ve otogreft gruplarında sırasıyla ort. 48.4 ve 42.3 ay). Sonuçlar: Radyografik olarak 46 hastada (80.7%) ortalama 5.9 ayda kaynama sağlandı (20 otogreftte ort. 6.8 ay; 26 allogreftte ort. 5.1 ay). Dördü allogreft, yedisi otogreft grubunda olan 11 hastada (19.3%) kaynama olmadı. Kaynama bakı- mından allogreft ve otogreft grupları arasında anlamlı fark bulunmadı. Tamamı küçük travmalar sonucu olmak üzere, altı hastada greft kırığı saptandı. Bu hastaların beşi otogreft, biri allogreft grubundandı. Üçü geçici peroneal sinir hasarı, ikisi el bileği subluksasyonu, ikisi enfeksiyon, biri Madelung deformitesi olmak üzere sekiz hastada (%14) komplikasyon görüldü. Çıkarımlar: Segmenter veya kaviter kemik defektlerinde otojen veya allojen kaynaklı vaskülarize olmayan fibula grefti ile rekonstrüksiyon başarı oranı yüksek olan güvenilir bir yöntemdir.

🔖

Cite This Article

BAŞARIR, K., SELEK, H. Y., YILDIZ, H. Y., SAĞLIK, Y. (2005). Nonvascularized fibular grafts in the reconstruction of bone defects in orthopedic oncology. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, Cilt: 39 - Sayı: 4, 300–306. https://ajindex.com/articles/354770

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Kumar VP, Satku K, Helm R, Pho RW. Radial reconstruction in segmental defects of both forearm bones. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 1988;70:815-7. 2. de Boer HH. The history of bone grafts. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988;(226):292-8
  2. Chase SW, Herndon CH. The fate of autogenous and homogenous bone grafts. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 1955;37:809-41
  3. Springfield D. Autograft reconstructions. Orthop Clin North Am 1996;27:483-92
  4. Lee EH, Goh JC, Helm R, Pho RW. Donor site morbidity following resection of the fibula. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 1990;72:129-31
  5. Weiland AJ, Phillips TW, Randolph MA. Bone grafts: a radiologic, histologic, and biomechanical model comparing autografts, allografts, and free vascularized bone grafts. Plast Reconstr Surg 1984;74:368-79
  6. Mack GR, Lichtman DM, MacDonald RI. Fibular autografts for distal defects of the radius. J Hand Surg [Am] 1979;4:576-83
  7. Cheng EY, Gebhardt MC. Allograft reconstructions of the shoulder after bone tumor resections. Orthop Clin North Am 1991;22:37-48
  8. Jofe MH, Gebhardt MC, Tomford WW, Mankin HJ. Reconstruction for defects of the proximal part of the femur using allograft arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 1988;70:507-16
  9. Loty B, Courpied JP, Tomeno B, Postel M, Forest M, Abelanet R. Bone allografts sterilised by irradiation. Biological properties, procurement and results of 150 massive allografts. Int Orthop 1990;14:237-42
  10. Veth R, van Hoesel R, Pruszczynski M, Hoogenhout J, Schreuder B, Wobbes T. Limb salvage in musculoskeletal oncology. Lancet Oncol 2003;4:343-50
  11. Smith RJ, Mankin HJ. Allograft replacement of distal radius for giant cell tumor. J Hand Surg [Am] 1977;2:299-308
  12. Devas MB, Sweetnam R. Stress fractures of the fibula; a review of fifty cases in athletes. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 1956;38:818-29
  13. Doi K, Tominaga S, Shibata T. Bone grafts with microvascular anastomoses of vascular pedicles: an experimental study in dogs. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 1977;59:809-15. 15.Yadav SS. Dual-fibular grafting for massive bone gaps in the lower extremity. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 1990;72:486-94. 16.Wilson PD Jr. A clinical study of the biomechanical behavior of massive bone transplants used to reconstruct large bone defects. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1972;87:81-109. 17. de Boer HH, Wood MB. Bone changes in the vascularised fibular graft. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 1989;71:374-8. 18. al-Zahrani S, Harding MG, Kremli M, Khan FA, Ikram A, Takroni T. Free fibular graft still has a place in the treatmen