Vascularized versus Nonvascularized Bone Grafts: What Is the Evidence?

Allsopp, Bradley J.; Hunter-Smith, David J.; Rozen, Warren M.

doi:10.1007/s11999-016-4769-4

Cited by 84 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 54 publications

(64 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The Q-DASH score, by which functionality was assessed, was median 6.8 (2.28 to 29.50). Although satisfactory results were obtained in general (4,10,11), the patients stated that they had difficulty in washing their backs mostly. According to the LEFS score (mean 76.5±2.81) in which the lower extremity was used as a donor, all subjects regained their lower extremity functions almost completely at the end of the follow-up.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Is Non-Vascularized Fibular Grafting an Effective Choice in the Treatment of Upper Extremity Pseudarthrosis?

Ekinci¹

2020

Erciyes Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To examine the efficacy of non-vascularized fibular grafts (NVFGs) in cases of isolated upper extremity pseudarthrosis, a subject covered by few publications in the literature. Materials and Methods: Twelve long bones of 11 patients treated with NVFGs for upper extremity pseudarthrosis between January 2014 and July 2018 in our clinic were included in this study. Demographic data, length of the NVFG, postoperative complications, postoperative recovery period, radiographic bone union, joint range of motion measurements, Quick-Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (Q-DASH) score for functional evaluation, and Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) or donor site morbidity were recorded. Results: Of the 11 cases (three females and 8 males; median age 42.5 years; range 11 to 54 years; mean follow up 24.58±9.31 months), five cases involved the humerus, three cases involved the radius, two cases involved the ulna, and two cases involved the clavicle. The mean amount of graft harvested from the donor site was 39.7±8.87 mm, while the graft union time was 6±0.50 months. Satisfactory Q-DASH [median 6.8 (2.28-29.50)] and LEFS scores (mean 76.5±2.81) were obtained Conclusion: Reconstruction with NVFGs is still an effective method in patients with problematic treatment of upper extremity long bone pseudarthrosis.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Conventional cancellous bone grafts have commonly served to reconstruct bone defects smaller than 6 cm. However, larger defects and cases of impaired vasculature require biomaterials, endoprostheses, and vascularized bone transfer (2)(3)(4).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Non-Vascularized Fibular Grafting an Effective Choice in the Treatment of Upper Extremity Pseudarthrosis?

Ekinci¹

2020

Erciyes Med J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Whether vascularized fibular graft does better than non-vascularized one? Allsopp et al performed a systematic review in 2016 to compare the vascularized and non-vascularized bone grafts, concluded that vascularization might increase the risk of complications without increasing union rates or time to union [37]. Moreover, reconstruction by vascularized fibular grafts require microsurgery to anastomose vessels and this will prolong operating time distinctly.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surgical options and reconstruction strategies for primary bone tumors of distal tibia: A systematic review of complications and functional outcome

Zhao

Yan

Guo

et al. 2019

Journal of Bone Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPrimary malignant or aggressive benign bone tumors rarely occur in distal tibia, and limb salvage remains the mainstay of surgical options. However, reconstruction methods for large bone defect after wide tumor resection in this location are debatable. The purpose of this systematical review is to critically evaluate each reconstruction method regarding the postoperative complications and functional outcome.MethodsA systematic review of the 33 studies including 337 cases with tumors affecting distal tibia was performed after searching the PubMed and EMBASE databases. Pooled descriptive statistics with separate analyses for postoperative complications and functional outcome of different reconstruction options were performed.Results290 (86.1%) patients received limb salvage procedures. Reconstruction strategies including biological reconstruction, such as autograft, allograft, distraction osteogenesis and non-biological prosthetic replacement. The patients received limb salvage procedures tended to have a higher MSTS score (77.1% vs 70.9%, P = .055) and a higher incidence of local relapse (28/290 vs 0/47, P = .052) than those amputated. Biological reconstruction methods provided better functional outcome (78.4% vs 72.2%, P = .017) compared with non-biological prosthetic reconstruction, although similarity of incidence of major complications (51/253 vs 12/37, P = .091). With respect to the comparison between autograft and allograft reconstruction, the autograft seemed to have less major postoperative complications occurrence (27/165 vs 22/78, P = .032), and consequently better functional outcome (MSTS score, 80.2% vs 74.3%, P = .025) than allograft reconstruction.ConclusionsLimb salvage results in better functional outcome compared with amputation. Biological reconstruction is more advocated than prosthetics replacement, and furthermore, autograft might be suggested to be the optimal reconstructive method with regard to better postoperative functional outcome and less major complications.

show abstract

“…Hierzu zählen [17,19] Analog zu der Spongiosaplastik stellt sich auch hier die Frage nach der maximalen Länge, die ein Defekt haben darf, um noch erfolgreich mittels eines autologen Grafts behandelt werden zu können. Es bleibt letztlich unklar, ob auch hier eine Defektlänge von 6 cm als Grenze anzusehen ist [36].…”

Section: Operative Technikunclassified

Unterarm – Strategien bei fehlgeschlagenen Osteosynthesen

Harbrecht¹,

Hackl²,

Wegmann³

et al. 2019

OP-JOURNAL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ZusammenfassungDer Unterarm ist als eine gelenkige Verbindung zwischen Ellenbogen und Handgelenk zu begreifen. Eine osteosynthetische Versorgung an Radius und Ulna bedarf eines profunden anatomischen Verständnisses, um die Funktion bestmöglich zu erhalten. Bei fehlgeschlagenen Osteosynthesen ist die Herausforderung ungleich höher. Ziel dieses Artikels ist es, Strategien vorzustellen, die im Falle einer Pseudarthrose, Infektion, bei speziellen Frakturformen oder Malunion nach primärer Osteosynthese zur Verfügung stehen.

show abstract

Vascularized versus Nonvascularized Bone Grafts: What Is the Evidence?

Cited by 84 publications

References 54 publications

Is Non-Vascularized Fibular Grafting an Effective Choice in the Treatment of Upper Extremity Pseudarthrosis?

Is Non-Vascularized Fibular Grafting an Effective Choice in the Treatment of Upper Extremity Pseudarthrosis?

Surgical options and reconstruction strategies for primary bone tumors of distal tibia: A systematic review of complications and functional outcome

Unterarm – Strategien bei fehlgeschlagenen Osteosynthesen

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About