SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Annals of Medical Research / 2018 / Cilt: 25 - Sayı: 4

Comparison of different grafting techniques in open wedge high tibial osteotomy in terms of bone healing and functional outcomes

Aydın ARSLAN
Pages
549–552
Publication Date
2022-10-12
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)

When the groups were evaluated in terms of delayed union, significantly high rates were found in allograft and hydroxyapatite groups when compared to the autograft group. (p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: The aim of this study was to compare bone healing and functional outcomes of open wedge high tibial osteotomy (OWHTO) performed with different grafting techniques.Material and Methods: From January 2009 to March 2014, 132 patients (145 knees) were included in the study.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Patients were followed for at least 3 years.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:When the groups were evaluated in terms of delayed union, significantly high rates were found in allograft and hydroxyapatite groups when compared to the autograft group. (p
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2009 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: The aim of this study was to compare bone healing and functional outcomes of open wedge high tibial osteotomy (OWHTO) performed with different grafting techniques.Material and Methods: From January 2009 to March 2014, 132 patients (145 knees) were included in the study. Lysholm knee scoring scale was used in preoperative and postoperative clinical evaluation of patients. Patients were followed for at least 3 years. Clinical status of patients, time to bone union and complications were compared.Results: Autograft was used in 31 knees (29 patients), allograft in 43 knees (39 patients), hydroxyapatite in 71 knees (64 patients), respectively. The mean duration of bone union was 11.9 ± 3.6 (8-19) weeks in the autograft group, 13.1 ± 3.8 (10-25) weeks in the allograft group and 14.4 ± 4.9 (10-28) weeks in the hydroxyapatite group. The duration of bone union in autograft patients was significantly shorter than that in patients treated with hydroxyapatite. When the groups were evaluated in terms of delayed union, significantly high rates were found in allograft and hydroxyapatite groups when compared to the autograft group. (p

🔖

Cite This Article

ARSLAN, A. (2022). Comparison of different grafting techniques in open wedge high tibial osteotomy in terms of bone healing and functional outcomes. Annals of Medical Research, Cilt: 25 - Sayı: 4, 549–552. https://ajindex.com/articles/447384

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Jackson JP, Waugh W. Tibial osteotomy for osteoarthritis of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1961;43:746-51.
  2. Lash NJ, Feller JA, Batty LM, et al. Bone grafts and bone substitutes for opening-wedge osteotomies of the knee: a systematic review. Arthroscopy. 2015;31:720-30.
  3. Amendola A, Bonasia DE. Results of high tibial osteotomy: review of the literature. Int Orthop. 2010;34:155-60.
  4. Slevin O, Ayeni OR, Hinterwimmer S, et al. The role of bone void fillers in medial opening wedge high tibial osteotomy: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016;24:3584-98.
  5. Arrington ED, Smith WJ, Chambers HG, et al. Complications of iliac crest bone graft harvesting. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;300-9.
  6. Aryee S, Imhoff AB, Rose T, et al. Do we need synthetic osteotomy augmentation materials for opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy. Biomaterials. 2008;29:3497-502.
  7. El-Assal MA, Khalifa YE, Abdel-Hamid MM, et al. Opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy without bone graft. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2010;18:961-6.
  8. Galla M, Lobenhoffer P. High tibial open wedge valgus osteotomy stabilized with the TomoFix™ plate fixator. Oper Orthop Traumatol 2004;16:397-417
  9. Kuremsky MA, Schaller TM, Hall CC, et al. Comparison of autograft vs allograft in opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy. J Arthroplasty. 2010;25:951-7.
  10. Lobenhoffer P, Agneskirchner J, Zoch W. Die öffnende valgisierende Osteotomie der proximalen Tibia mit Fixation durch einen medialen Platten fixateur. Orthopade. 2004;33:153-16.
  11. Stuart M, Backstein D, Logan M, et al. Osteotomy about the knee: international roundtable discussion. Insall Scott Surg, Knee. 2012. pp. 944-51. Zorzi AR, da Silva HG, Muszkat C, et al. Opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy with and without bone graft. Artif Organs. 2011;35:301-7. Amis AA. Biomechanics of high tibial osteotomy. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013;21:197-205.
  12. Hernigou P, Medevielle D, Debeyre J, et al. Proximal tibial osteotomy for osteoarthritis with varus deformity. A ten to thirteen-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1987;69:332-54.
  13. Fujisawa Y, Masuhara K, Shiomi S. The effect of high tibial osteotomy on osteoarthritis of the knee. An arthroscopic study of 54 knee joints. Orthop Clin North Am. 1979;10:585-608.
  14. Liu-Barba D, Hull ML, Howell SM. Coupled motions under compressive load in intact and ACL-deficient knees: a cadaveric study. J Biomech Eng. 2007;129:818-24.
  15. Gouin F, Yaouanc F, Waast D, et al. Open wedge high tibial osteotomies: calcium-phosphate