Cargando…

Iliac Bone Harvesting Techniques for Bone Reconstruction. Comparative Study Between Tricortical Bone Harvesting vs Trapdoor Technique

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of trapdoor-procedure-based bone harvesting and tricortical iliac bone harvesting on the iliac bone-graft donor site pain experienced by patients and their clinical effects. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed using the clinical data of 65 patients w...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhu, Jia-Fu, Xu, Wei-Xing, Hu, Qiang, Wu, Tian-Quan, Liu, Hong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7320896/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32606715
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S257336
_version_ 1783551340590399488
author Zhu, Jia-Fu
Xu, Wei-Xing
Hu, Qiang
Wu, Tian-Quan
Liu, Hong
author_facet Zhu, Jia-Fu
Xu, Wei-Xing
Hu, Qiang
Wu, Tian-Quan
Liu, Hong
author_sort Zhu, Jia-Fu
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of trapdoor-procedure-based bone harvesting and tricortical iliac bone harvesting on the iliac bone-graft donor site pain experienced by patients and their clinical effects. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed using the clinical data of 65 patients with tibial plateau fractures who received autologous iliac bone-supporting grafts in two hospitals between January 2014 and January 2019. The patients who received trapdoor-procedure-based bone harvesting (34 cases) were in the experimental group, and those who received tricortical iliac bone harvesting (31 cases) were in the control group. This study compared differences in iliac bone-graft donor site incision length, intraoperative blood loss, amount of bones harvested, operation time, and postoperative complications between the two bone-harvesting methods. Subsequently, it evaluated the pain experienced by the two patient groups in their iliac bone-graft donor sites and their clinical effects. RESULTS: One week after surgery, the differences between the iliac bone-graft donor site pain score (measured using SF-MPQ-2) of the experimental group and the control group were not statistically different. However, 3 weeks, 5 weeks, and 3 months after surgery, the iliac bone-graft donor site pain scores of the experimental group were significantly lower than those of the control group. The iliac bone-graft donor site incision length and operation time of the experimental group were not significantly different from those of the control group. However, the iliac bone-graft donor site intraoperative blood loss, amount of bones harvested and the incidence of complications of the experimental group were significantly lower than those of the control group. CONCLUSION: Trapdoor-procedure-based bone harvesting has lower donor site pain, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative complications. However, for bone grafting in regions with significant bone loss, tricortical iliac bone harvesting remains the optimal option.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7320896
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73208962020-06-29 Iliac Bone Harvesting Techniques for Bone Reconstruction. Comparative Study Between Tricortical Bone Harvesting vs Trapdoor Technique Zhu, Jia-Fu Xu, Wei-Xing Hu, Qiang Wu, Tian-Quan Liu, Hong Ther Clin Risk Manag Original Research OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of trapdoor-procedure-based bone harvesting and tricortical iliac bone harvesting on the iliac bone-graft donor site pain experienced by patients and their clinical effects. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed using the clinical data of 65 patients with tibial plateau fractures who received autologous iliac bone-supporting grafts in two hospitals between January 2014 and January 2019. The patients who received trapdoor-procedure-based bone harvesting (34 cases) were in the experimental group, and those who received tricortical iliac bone harvesting (31 cases) were in the control group. This study compared differences in iliac bone-graft donor site incision length, intraoperative blood loss, amount of bones harvested, operation time, and postoperative complications between the two bone-harvesting methods. Subsequently, it evaluated the pain experienced by the two patient groups in their iliac bone-graft donor sites and their clinical effects. RESULTS: One week after surgery, the differences between the iliac bone-graft donor site pain score (measured using SF-MPQ-2) of the experimental group and the control group were not statistically different. However, 3 weeks, 5 weeks, and 3 months after surgery, the iliac bone-graft donor site pain scores of the experimental group were significantly lower than those of the control group. The iliac bone-graft donor site incision length and operation time of the experimental group were not significantly different from those of the control group. However, the iliac bone-graft donor site intraoperative blood loss, amount of bones harvested and the incidence of complications of the experimental group were significantly lower than those of the control group. CONCLUSION: Trapdoor-procedure-based bone harvesting has lower donor site pain, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative complications. However, for bone grafting in regions with significant bone loss, tricortical iliac bone harvesting remains the optimal option. Dove 2020-06-23 /pmc/articles/PMC7320896/ /pubmed/32606715 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S257336 Text en © 2020 Zhu et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
Zhu, Jia-Fu
Xu, Wei-Xing
Hu, Qiang
Wu, Tian-Quan
Liu, Hong
Iliac Bone Harvesting Techniques for Bone Reconstruction. Comparative Study Between Tricortical Bone Harvesting vs Trapdoor Technique
title Iliac Bone Harvesting Techniques for Bone Reconstruction. Comparative Study Between Tricortical Bone Harvesting vs Trapdoor Technique
title_full Iliac Bone Harvesting Techniques for Bone Reconstruction. Comparative Study Between Tricortical Bone Harvesting vs Trapdoor Technique
title_fullStr Iliac Bone Harvesting Techniques for Bone Reconstruction. Comparative Study Between Tricortical Bone Harvesting vs Trapdoor Technique
title_full_unstemmed Iliac Bone Harvesting Techniques for Bone Reconstruction. Comparative Study Between Tricortical Bone Harvesting vs Trapdoor Technique
title_short Iliac Bone Harvesting Techniques for Bone Reconstruction. Comparative Study Between Tricortical Bone Harvesting vs Trapdoor Technique
title_sort iliac bone harvesting techniques for bone reconstruction. comparative study between tricortical bone harvesting vs trapdoor technique
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7320896/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32606715
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/TCRM.S257336
work_keys_str_mv AT zhujiafu iliacboneharvestingtechniquesforbonereconstructioncomparativestudybetweentricorticalboneharvestingvstrapdoortechnique
AT xuweixing iliacboneharvestingtechniquesforbonereconstructioncomparativestudybetweentricorticalboneharvestingvstrapdoortechnique
AT huqiang iliacboneharvestingtechniquesforbonereconstructioncomparativestudybetweentricorticalboneharvestingvstrapdoortechnique
AT wutianquan iliacboneharvestingtechniquesforbonereconstructioncomparativestudybetweentricorticalboneharvestingvstrapdoortechnique
AT liuhong iliacboneharvestingtechniquesforbonereconstructioncomparativestudybetweentricorticalboneharvestingvstrapdoortechnique