Cargando…
Bioactive glass in the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis—a valid option?
Chronic osteomyelitis continues to represent a challenge both for patients and the treating physician, especially in the presence of multiple germs. We performed a literature review assessing the current role of the indications of bioactive glass. We included studies about patients with chronic oste...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10441679/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37609479 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/OI9.0000000000000105 |
_version_ | 1785093424067641344 |
---|---|
author | Ziegenhain, Franziska Neuhaus, Valentin Pape, Hans-Christoph |
author_facet | Ziegenhain, Franziska Neuhaus, Valentin Pape, Hans-Christoph |
author_sort | Ziegenhain, Franziska |
collection | PubMed |
description | Chronic osteomyelitis continues to represent a challenge both for patients and the treating physician, especially in the presence of multiple germs. We performed a literature review assessing the current role of the indications of bioactive glass. We included studies about patients with chronic osteomyelitis that were treated with S53P4. A literature review of Medline via PubMed was performed. After the exclusion of case reports, 7 studies were included in the narrative review. Recurrence of infection was defined as the main outcome parameter. Six of 7 studies were retrospective, or case studies with a relatively small sample size (total patient number N = 274). The overall recurrence rate was 10.6%. Studies that compared the outcome of the treatment with S53P4 versus antibiotic-loaded polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) revealed no significant difference. The data reviewed indicate that in cases of multiple bacteria and resistance to antibiotic treatment, bioglass may be a valuable treatment alternative to other forms of spacers (e.g., PMMA). This statement is limited by the fact that the number of described cases is very low. Therefore, a definitive statement of its effectiveness cannot be made at this point. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10441679 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-104416792023-08-22 Bioactive glass in the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis—a valid option? Ziegenhain, Franziska Neuhaus, Valentin Pape, Hans-Christoph OTA Int Meeting Proceedings Chronic osteomyelitis continues to represent a challenge both for patients and the treating physician, especially in the presence of multiple germs. We performed a literature review assessing the current role of the indications of bioactive glass. We included studies about patients with chronic osteomyelitis that were treated with S53P4. A literature review of Medline via PubMed was performed. After the exclusion of case reports, 7 studies were included in the narrative review. Recurrence of infection was defined as the main outcome parameter. Six of 7 studies were retrospective, or case studies with a relatively small sample size (total patient number N = 274). The overall recurrence rate was 10.6%. Studies that compared the outcome of the treatment with S53P4 versus antibiotic-loaded polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) revealed no significant difference. The data reviewed indicate that in cases of multiple bacteria and resistance to antibiotic treatment, bioglass may be a valuable treatment alternative to other forms of spacers (e.g., PMMA). This statement is limited by the fact that the number of described cases is very low. Therefore, a definitive statement of its effectiveness cannot be made at this point. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021-06-15 /pmc/articles/PMC10441679/ /pubmed/37609479 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/OI9.0000000000000105 Text en Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Orthopaedic Trauma Association. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) |
spellingShingle | Meeting Proceedings Ziegenhain, Franziska Neuhaus, Valentin Pape, Hans-Christoph Bioactive glass in the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis—a valid option? |
title | Bioactive glass in the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis—a valid option? |
title_full | Bioactive glass in the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis—a valid option? |
title_fullStr | Bioactive glass in the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis—a valid option? |
title_full_unstemmed | Bioactive glass in the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis—a valid option? |
title_short | Bioactive glass in the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis—a valid option? |
title_sort | bioactive glass in the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis—a valid option? |
topic | Meeting Proceedings |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10441679/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37609479 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/OI9.0000000000000105 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ziegenhainfranziska bioactiveglassinthetreatmentofchronicosteomyelitisavalidoption AT neuhausvalentin bioactiveglassinthetreatmentofchronicosteomyelitisavalidoption AT papehanschristoph bioactiveglassinthetreatmentofchronicosteomyelitisavalidoption |