Efficacy comparison of vascularized iliac crest bone flap and Ilizarov bone transport in the treatment of traumatic bone defects of the tibia combined with large soft tissue defects

Enhancement of in vitro and in vivo bone repair performance of decalcified bone/gelma by desferrioxamine

Autologous and allogeneic bone grafting is currently the clinical gold standard for the treatment of bone defects; however, it is limited by the scarcity of autologous sources and the risk of secondary trauma, as well as the complications of disease transmission and immune rejection associated with allogeneic grafts. The clinical management of bone defects remains a significant challenge. In this study, we prepared a demineralized bone matrix/gelatin methacrylate composite hydrogel loaded with deferoxamine (GelMA/DBM/DFO) using a freeze-drying method and investigated its properties. Assessments using CCK-8, live-dead fluorescence staining, alkaline phosphatase staining, and Alizarin Red staining indicated that the GelMA/DBM/DFO composite hydrogel demonstrated superior biocompatibility and in vitro osteogenic differentiation capacity compared with the GelMA/DBM composite hydrogel. We established a cranial defect model in Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats and examined peripheral blood indices, micro-computed tomography (Micro-CT), hematoxylin and eosin (HE) staining, Masson's trichrome staining, and immunohistochemical staining for bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP-2) and collagen type I (COL-1). Both hydrogels exhibited good biosafety and the GelMA/DBM/DFO hydrogel showed more effective repair of cranial defects in SD rats. This study provides a novel material for bone-defect repair.

Cable-asisted bone transport versus circular external fixators-asisted bone transport in the management of bone defects of the Tibia: clinical and imaging results

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy, clinical outcomes, and complications of cable-asisted bone transport (CASt) and circular external fixator-assisted bone transport (CEFt) methods in the management of bone defects of the tibia.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 32 patients who underwent segmental bone transport for tibial bone defects between January 2006 and January 2020 and met the study inclusion criteria. Patients were categorized into two groups: CASt group (n = 16) and CEFt group (n = 16). The primary outcome measures included radiological parameters (External Fixator Index (EFI), Radiological Consolidation Time (RCT), and Radiological Consolidation Index (RCI)), functional independence (Lower Extremity Functional Index, LEFI) and functional outcomes (ASAMI Bone and Functional Scores). Secondary outcomes included pain levels (Visual Analog Scale, VAS), and complication rates (Paley's and Checketts-Otterburn classifications).

RESULTS

The CASt method resulted in significantly reduced pain scores during distraction (VAS: 4.81 ± 0.98 vs. 6.75 ± 0.86; p = 0.001). Pin-tract infection rates were significantly lower in the CASt group compared to the CEFt group (50% vs. 93.8%; p = 0.013). There was no significant difference between the groups in radiological (EFI, RCT, RCI) and functional outcomes (ASAMI scores) (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Both CASt and CEFt methods are effective and reliable options in the management of bone defects of the tibia. However, CASt offers advantages such as lower pin-tract infection rates and less pain during distraction, resulting in greater patient comfort and compliance. Given its less invasive nature, CASt may be preferable in patients at higher risk of infection or with a low pain threshold. However, the technical complexity of this method requires experienced surgical application.

Clinical effect of free chimeric anterolateral thigh flap and chimeric thoracodorsal artery perforator flap in chronic osteomyelitis

BACKGROUND

Chronic osteomyelitis poses a formidable challenge for orthopedic practitioners in clinical practice. Chimeric perforator flap is a commonly used repair method for chronic osteomyelitis. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy of chimeric anterolateral thigh flap (C-ALTP) and chimeric thoracodorsal artery perforator flap (C-TDAP) for the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on patients with chronic osteomyelitis of the lower extremity who underwent two kinds of treatment with chimeric perforator flaps from January 2014 to March 2022. The preoperative basic data and the operative and postoperative basic information of the two groups were collected and statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients were included in this study, and both groups achieved satisfactory aesthetic and functional results. Intraoperative results showed that the intraoperative blood loss and flap acquisition time in the C-TDAP group were less than those in the C-ALTP group. The incidence of postoperative complications in the donor and recipient sites in the C-TDAP group was significantly lower than that in the C-ALTP group, which led to a high reoperation rate in the C-ALTP group. Long-term follow-up showed that the wound healing time and weight-bearing walking time in the C-TDAP group were less than those in the C-ALTP group.

CONCLUSIONS

Chimeric perforator flaps can effectively be used to treat osteomyelitis with composite tissue defects, eliminate inflammation of the affected limbs, and promote wound healing. However, C-TDAP flaps have more reliable healing effects on wounds and donor sites, and have fewer complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, Case-control study.

Masquelet combined with free-flap technique versus the Ilizarov bone transport technique for severe composite tibial and soft-tissue defects

BACKGROUND

The treatment of bone and soft-tissue defects after open fractures remains challenging. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy of the Masquelet technique combined with the free-flap technique (MFFT) versus the Ilizarov bone transport technique (IBTT) for the treatment of severe composite tibial and soft-tissue defects.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed the data of 65 patients with tibial and soft-tissue defects and Gustilo type IIIB/C open fractures treated at our hospital between April 2015 and December 2021. The patients were divided into two groups based on the treatment method: group A (n = 35) was treated with the MFFT and internal fixation, and group B (n = 30) was treated with the IBTT.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up period was 28 months (range 13-133 months). Complete union of both soft-tissue and bone defects was achieved in all cases. The mean bone-union times were 6 months (range 3-12 months) in group A and 11 months (range 6-23 month) in group B, with a significant difference between the two groups (Z = -4.11, P = 0.001). The mean hospital stay was 28 days (range 14-67 d) in group A which was significantly longer than the mean stay of 18 days (range 10-43 d) in group B (Z = -2.608, P = 0.009). There were no significant differences in the infection rate between group A (17.1 %) and group B (26.7%) (χ2 = 0.867, P = 0.352). The Total Physical Health Scores were 81.51 ± 6.86 (range 67-90) in group A and 75.83±16.14 (range 44-98) in group B, with no significant difference between the two groups (t = 1.894, P = 0.063). The Total Mental Health Scores were significantly higher in group A (90.49 ± 6.37; range 78-98) than in group B (84.70 ± 13.72; range 60-98) (t = 2.232, P = 0.029).

CONCLUSION

Compared with IBTT, MFFT is a better choice of treatment for open tibial and soft-tissue defects with Gustilo IIIB/C fractures. IBTT is the preferred option when the tibial bone defect is large or if the surgeon's expertise in microsurgery is limited.

Ilizarov method and its combined methods in the treatment of long bone defects of the lower extremity: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Ilizarov method has become one of primary methods for treating bone defects. Currently, there is growing trend in the application of modified Ilizarov methods (e.g., applying unilateral external fixators or with flap tissue) and its combined methods (e.g., Ilizarov method with antibiotic spacer or internal fixation) to manage bone defects. However, there is a lack of studies with systematical evaluation of the clinical effects of these evolving methods. This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis for overall evaluating the clinical effects on long bone defects of lower extremity in Ilizarov methods and its combined methods.

METHODS

Studies were identified in three electronic databases (Pubmed, Embase and Cochrane Library) from the earliest indexing year through November 01, 2022, and relevant data were extracted subsequently. The total number of participants, number of participants with bone unions, bone result or functional result, and related complications including pin infection, pin loosening, pain, refracture, limb discrepancy, malalignment, joint stiffness, recurrent infection, and amputation were extracted in this study. Then, union rate (defined as the proportion of patients who achieved bone unions) and specific complication incidence rate (defined as the proportion of patients who experienced specific complication) were pooled estimated respectively. Relative risk (RR) was used for comparing the clinical effects among various Ilizarov technique.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight case series studies, 29 comparative studies, and 3 randomized clinical trials were finally included. The union rate of Ilizarov methods was 99.29% (95% CI: 98.67% ~ 99.86%) in tibial defects and 98.81% (95% CI: 98.81% ~ 100.00%) in femoral defects. The union rate of Ilizarov method with antibiotic spacer and intramedullary nail in tibial defects was 99.58% (95% CI: 98.05% ~ 100.00%) and 95.02% (95% CI: 87.28% ~ 100.00%), respectively. Compared to the Ilizarov methods, the union rate of the Ilizarov method with antibiotic spacer in tibial defects increased slightly (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 1.01 ~ 1.04). Meanwhile, compared to Ilizarov methods, we found lower excellent rate in bone result in Ilizarov method with antibiotic spacer, with the moderate to high heterogeneity. Compared to the Ilizarov method, lower rate of pin infection, higher rate of recurrent infection and amputation were observed in Ilizarov method with intramedullary nail, however, the findings about the comparison of pin infection and recurrent infection between the two groups were presented with high degree of statistical heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

Our study confirmed the reliable treatment of Ilizarov methods and its combined technique on long bone defects, and founded there were significant differences on some complications rate between Ilizarov methods and its combined technique. However, the findings need to be confirmed by further studies.