Comparative Study of Proximal Tibia and Iliac Crest Bone Graft Donor Sites in Treatment of Orthopaedic Pathologies

Abstract

Introduction: Bone graft is harvested from bone and used to stimulate bone healing due to its properties. The aims of the study were to compare the quantity of graft harvested from proximal tibia and iliac crest, and the complications at these donor sites.Materials and Methods: This was a prospective study carried out on all consecutive patients who had orthopaedic procedures that required bone grafting at the study centre, from April, 2015 to March, 2016.Results: During the study period, 86 patients were recruited; 43 of these patients had bone graft harvested from the proximal tibia, while the other 43 patients had graft harvested from the iliac crest. There were 53 males, and 33 females. Mean age of patients was 41.2 ± 11 years and 40.8 ± 16 years, for proximal tibia and iliac crest group respectively. Average compressed volume of graft harvested from proximal tibia and iliac crest were 7cm3 and 5.5cm3 respectively. Non-unions were the commonest indications for bone grafting, femur was the commonest bone requiring bone grafting. Complications such as primary haemorrhage, pain and surgical site infection were commoner with iliac crest than proximal tibia donor sites, however bone graft harvested from both proximal tibia and iliac crest provided adequate bone union of the indicated procedure.Conclusion: Larger quantity of graft can be harvested from proximal tibia than the iliac crest. Though graft harvested from both the proximal tibia and the iliac crest have good healing properties, the proximal tibia donor site gave less complication than the iliac crest.

Comparing morbidities of bone graft harvesting from the anterior iliac crest and proximal tibia: a retrospective study

“…In our study, we harvested the bone graft as much as possible during surgery. Even the graft volume from proximal tibia was larger than the iliac crest, the proximal tibia donor site gave less complication than the iliac crest, according to the report of Salawu et al [ 25 ], and the present study’s result showed there was less pain in the proximal tibia harvest site. The lack of comparison of quantity of harvest graft is one our limitations, and bone harvest at two sites of the same person simultaneously for the comparison of volume was also not practicable in our retrospective study.…”

Management of femoral non-union with post-traumatic bone defect using second-generation PRECICE® nail - A case report

“…The authors chose the latter since evidence suggests that there is no significant difference in the volume of cancellous bone available for harvest between the PT and iliac crest [11] . Furthermore, utilising the PT as a harvest site causes fewer complications such as pain, primary haemorrhage, and surgical site infection [12] , [13] .…”

Outcomes and complications of the reamer irrigator aspirator versus traditional iliac crest bone graft harvesting: a systematic review and meta-analysis

“…Carlock et al reported a high union rate after ICBG, with 232 unions in 242 treated patients [ 35 ]. Furthermore, On Salawu et al reported a higher union rate following ICBG, with 81 unions in 86 patients [ 36 ]. In this regard, the data in the literature are controversial, because the RIA group is characterized by a higher union rate [ 17 , 25 ].…”