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

Jia-Fu Zhu,1 Wei-Xing Xu,1 Qiang Hu,1 Tian-Quan Wu,2 Hong Liu1 1Department of Orthopaedics, Tongde Hospital of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou 310012, People’s Republic of China; 2Department of Orthopaedics, Shaoxing Keqiao District Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shaoxing 312030, Pe...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Zhu JF, Xu WX, Hu Q, Wu TQ, Liu H
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Dove Medical Press 2020-06-01
Series:Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.dovepress.com/iliac-bone-harvesting-techniques-for-bone-reconstruction-comparative-s-peer-reviewed-article-TCRM
_version_ 1819118326169731072
author Zhu JF
Xu WX
Hu Q
Wu TQ
Liu H
author_facet Zhu JF
Xu WX
Hu Q
Wu TQ
Liu H
author_sort Zhu JF
collection DOAJ
description Jia-Fu Zhu,1 Wei-Xing Xu,1 Qiang Hu,1 Tian-Quan Wu,2 Hong Liu1 1Department of Orthopaedics, Tongde Hospital of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou 310012, People’s Republic of China; 2Department of Orthopaedics, Shaoxing Keqiao District Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shaoxing 312030, People’s Republic of ChinaCorrespondence: Wei-Xing XuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Tongde Hospital of Zhejiang Province, 234 Gucui Road, Hangzhou 310012, People’s Republic of ChinaTel +86-13750837328Email xwxspine@163.comObjective: 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.Keywords: iliac bone, bone grafting, pain, clinical effect
first_indexed 2024-12-22T05:47:06Z
format Article
id doaj.art-774949bcb4474f9c9e1bf89e60eba97c
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1178-203X
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-22T05:47:06Z
publishDate 2020-06-01
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format Article
series Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
spelling doaj.art-774949bcb4474f9c9e1bf89e60eba97c2022-12-21T18:37:00ZengDove Medical PressTherapeutics and Clinical Risk Management1178-203X2020-06-01Volume 1655956554736Iliac Bone Harvesting Techniques for Bone Reconstruction. Comparative Study Between Tricortical Bone Harvesting vs Trapdoor TechniqueZhu JFXu WXHu QWu TQLiu HJia-Fu Zhu,1 Wei-Xing Xu,1 Qiang Hu,1 Tian-Quan Wu,2 Hong Liu1 1Department of Orthopaedics, Tongde Hospital of Zhejiang Province, Hangzhou 310012, People’s Republic of China; 2Department of Orthopaedics, Shaoxing Keqiao District Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shaoxing 312030, People’s Republic of ChinaCorrespondence: Wei-Xing XuDepartment of Orthopaedics, Tongde Hospital of Zhejiang Province, 234 Gucui Road, Hangzhou 310012, People’s Republic of ChinaTel +86-13750837328Email xwxspine@163.comObjective: 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.Keywords: iliac bone, bone grafting, pain, clinical effecthttps://www.dovepress.com/iliac-bone-harvesting-techniques-for-bone-reconstruction-comparative-s-peer-reviewed-article-TCRMiliac bonebone graftingpainclinical effect
spellingShingle Zhu JF
Xu WX
Hu Q
Wu TQ
Liu H
Iliac Bone Harvesting Techniques for Bone Reconstruction. Comparative Study Between Tricortical Bone Harvesting vs Trapdoor Technique
Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
iliac bone
bone grafting
pain
clinical effect
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 iliac bone
bone grafting
pain
clinical effect
url https://www.dovepress.com/iliac-bone-harvesting-techniques-for-bone-reconstruction-comparative-s-peer-reviewed-article-TCRM
work_keys_str_mv AT zhujf iliacboneharvestingtechniquesforbonereconstructioncomparativestudybetweentricorticalboneharvestingvstrapdoortechnique
AT xuwx iliacboneharvestingtechniquesforbonereconstructioncomparativestudybetweentricorticalboneharvestingvstrapdoortechnique
AT huq iliacboneharvestingtechniquesforbonereconstructioncomparativestudybetweentricorticalboneharvestingvstrapdoortechnique
AT wutq iliacboneharvestingtechniquesforbonereconstructioncomparativestudybetweentricorticalboneharvestingvstrapdoortechnique
AT liuh iliacboneharvestingtechniquesforbonereconstructioncomparativestudybetweentricorticalboneharvestingvstrapdoortechnique