Cargando…

Management of acute bone loss following high grade open tibia fractures. Review of evidence on distraction osteogenesis and induced membrane techniques

INTRODUCTION: Optimal treatment for acute post-traumatic bone loss in the tibia remains unclear. Distraction osteogenesis (DO) and induced membrane technique (IM) have been established as the mainstays of treatment. Aim of this article is to review the current evidence regarding the use of these two...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Benulic, Crt, Canton, Gianluca, Gril, Iztok, Murena, Luigi, Kristan, Anze
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Mattioli 1885 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7944690/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33559616
http://dx.doi.org/10.23750/abm.v91i14-S.10890
_version_ 1783662723091922944
author Benulic, Crt
Canton, Gianluca
Gril, Iztok
Murena, Luigi
Kristan, Anze
author_facet Benulic, Crt
Canton, Gianluca
Gril, Iztok
Murena, Luigi
Kristan, Anze
author_sort Benulic, Crt
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Optimal treatment for acute post-traumatic bone loss in the tibia remains unclear. Distraction osteogenesis (DO) and induced membrane technique (IM) have been established as the mainstays of treatment. Aim of this article is to review the current evidence regarding the use of these two methods. METHODS: A review of the MEDLINE database was performed with strict inclusion and exclusion criteria focusing on treatment of the acute bone loss after open tibia fractures with DO and IM. Bone union rate was taken as the primary outcome and infection rate as secondary outcome. RESULTS: Four studies out of 78 on the use of the DO and three studies out of 18 on the use of the IM technique matched the inclusion criteria. Union rate in the DO group ranged between 92% and 100%, with infection rates between 0 and 4%. In the IM group, union was reached in 42% to 100% of cases, with septic complications occurring in 12% to 43%. Differences in union rate and infection rate reached statistical significance. DISCUSSION: We found a considerable evidence gap regarding treatment of bone loss in high grade open tibia fractures. The limitations of our study prevented us from drawing clear causative conclusions on the results. Although our study points to higher union rates and lower infection rate with the use of the DO technique, the results remain preliminary and further high-level evidence is needed to establish the roles of DO and IM in treatment of acute bone loss in open tibia fractures. (www.actabiomedica.it)
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7944690
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Mattioli 1885
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79446902021-03-10 Management of acute bone loss following high grade open tibia fractures. Review of evidence on distraction osteogenesis and induced membrane techniques Benulic, Crt Canton, Gianluca Gril, Iztok Murena, Luigi Kristan, Anze Acta Biomed Review INTRODUCTION: Optimal treatment for acute post-traumatic bone loss in the tibia remains unclear. Distraction osteogenesis (DO) and induced membrane technique (IM) have been established as the mainstays of treatment. Aim of this article is to review the current evidence regarding the use of these two methods. METHODS: A review of the MEDLINE database was performed with strict inclusion and exclusion criteria focusing on treatment of the acute bone loss after open tibia fractures with DO and IM. Bone union rate was taken as the primary outcome and infection rate as secondary outcome. RESULTS: Four studies out of 78 on the use of the DO and three studies out of 18 on the use of the IM technique matched the inclusion criteria. Union rate in the DO group ranged between 92% and 100%, with infection rates between 0 and 4%. In the IM group, union was reached in 42% to 100% of cases, with septic complications occurring in 12% to 43%. Differences in union rate and infection rate reached statistical significance. DISCUSSION: We found a considerable evidence gap regarding treatment of bone loss in high grade open tibia fractures. The limitations of our study prevented us from drawing clear causative conclusions on the results. Although our study points to higher union rates and lower infection rate with the use of the DO technique, the results remain preliminary and further high-level evidence is needed to establish the roles of DO and IM in treatment of acute bone loss in open tibia fractures. (www.actabiomedica.it) Mattioli 1885 2020 2020-12-30 /pmc/articles/PMC7944690/ /pubmed/33559616 http://dx.doi.org/10.23750/abm.v91i14-S.10890 Text en Copyright: © 2020 ACTA BIO MEDICA SOCIETY OF MEDICINE AND NATURAL SCIENCES OF PARMA http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
spellingShingle Review
Benulic, Crt
Canton, Gianluca
Gril, Iztok
Murena, Luigi
Kristan, Anze
Management of acute bone loss following high grade open tibia fractures. Review of evidence on distraction osteogenesis and induced membrane techniques
title Management of acute bone loss following high grade open tibia fractures. Review of evidence on distraction osteogenesis and induced membrane techniques
title_full Management of acute bone loss following high grade open tibia fractures. Review of evidence on distraction osteogenesis and induced membrane techniques
title_fullStr Management of acute bone loss following high grade open tibia fractures. Review of evidence on distraction osteogenesis and induced membrane techniques
title_full_unstemmed Management of acute bone loss following high grade open tibia fractures. Review of evidence on distraction osteogenesis and induced membrane techniques
title_short Management of acute bone loss following high grade open tibia fractures. Review of evidence on distraction osteogenesis and induced membrane techniques
title_sort management of acute bone loss following high grade open tibia fractures. review of evidence on distraction osteogenesis and induced membrane techniques
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7944690/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33559616
http://dx.doi.org/10.23750/abm.v91i14-S.10890
work_keys_str_mv AT benuliccrt managementofacutebonelossfollowinghighgradeopentibiafracturesreviewofevidenceondistractionosteogenesisandinducedmembranetechniques
AT cantongianluca managementofacutebonelossfollowinghighgradeopentibiafracturesreviewofevidenceondistractionosteogenesisandinducedmembranetechniques
AT griliztok managementofacutebonelossfollowinghighgradeopentibiafracturesreviewofevidenceondistractionosteogenesisandinducedmembranetechniques
AT murenaluigi managementofacutebonelossfollowinghighgradeopentibiafracturesreviewofevidenceondistractionosteogenesisandinducedmembranetechniques
AT kristananze managementofacutebonelossfollowinghighgradeopentibiafracturesreviewofevidenceondistractionosteogenesisandinducedmembranetechniques