Wu Yongwei, Yin Qudong, Zhou Zihong, Gu Sanjun, Rui Yongjun, Li Fengfeng
1Department of Orthopaedics, Wuxi No. 9 People's Hospital Affiliated to Soochow University, No. 999 Liangxi Road, Wuxi, 214062 Jiangsu China.
2Orthopaedic Department, Wuxi People's Hospital, Wuxi, 214000 Jiangsu China.
Indian J Orthop. 2020 Jan 24;54(2):156-163. doi: 10.1007/s43465-019-00006-4. eCollection 2020 Apr.
There are no reports on the similarities and differences between induced membrane (IM) technique and wrap bone graft(WBG) technique.
The aims of this study are to investigate the effects of IM technique and WBR technique in repairing segmental bone defects, and to analyze the similarities and differences between them.
66 patients of tibial segmental bone defects treated by IM technique and WBG technique were retrospectively analyzed. Aged 13-69 years old with an average of 35.3 years old. IM technique was divided into early IM group (bone grafting at 6-8 weeks of bone cement filling) and late IM group (bone grafting after 8 weeks of bone cement filling). WBG was divided into titanium mesh group and line suturing cortical bone blocks group. There were 11 cases, 25 cases, 10 cases and 20 cases in the early IM group, late IM group, titanium mesh group and line suturing group, respectively. Bone healing, complications and functional recovery (Paley's method) were observed, the causes of nonunion and delayed union and factors affecting bone healing were analyzed.
There were no significant differences in terms of age, sex, defect length, course, fixation method, defect location and preoperative function of adjacent joints among the 4 groups. All patients were followed up for 12-50 months, with an average of 20.1 months. The clinical healing time of early IM group, late IM group, titanium mesh group and line suturing group were (5.81 ± 0.75) months, (7.56 ± 1.66) months, (7.50 ± 0.70) months and (7.81 ± 1.81) months, respectively, showing significant differences among the 4 groups (= 0.005). However, only early IM group had significant difference with other groups (< 0.05), while no significance was found between late IM group and WBR group, between titanium mesh group and suture group (> 0.05). There were no significant differences in healing ration, complications and functional recovery of adjacent joints among the 4 groups (> .05). There were 4 cases of nonunion and delayed union, all of which were caused by poor quantity or quality of bone graft or unstable bone graft or internal fixation.
Both IM technique and WBG technique are effective method for repairing segmental bone defects. In addition to mechanical encapsulation, early IM has biological osteogenesis. However, mechanical encapsulation is a common basis for repairing bone defects, and biological osteogenesis can enhance bone healing.
目前尚无关于诱导膜(IM)技术与包裹式骨移植(WBG)技术异同的报道。
本研究旨在探讨IM技术和WBG技术修复节段性骨缺损的效果,并分析两者之间的异同。
回顾性分析66例采用IM技术和WBG技术治疗的胫骨节段性骨缺损患者。年龄13 - 69岁,平均35.3岁。IM技术分为早期IM组(骨水泥填充6 - 8周后植骨)和晚期IM组(骨水泥填充8周后植骨)。WBG分为钛网组和皮质骨块线缝组。早期IM组、晚期IM组、钛网组和线缝组分别有11例、25例、10例和20例。观察骨愈合情况、并发症及功能恢复情况(采用Paley法),分析骨不连和延迟愈合的原因及影响骨愈合的因素。
4组患者在年龄、性别、缺损长度、病程、固定方式、缺损部位及相邻关节术前功能方面无显著差异。所有患者均随访12 - 50个月,平均20.1个月。早期IM组、晚期IM组、钛网组和线缝组的临床愈合时间分别为(5.81±0.75)个月、(7.56±1.66)个月、(7.50±0.70)个月和(7.81±1.81)个月,4组间差异有统计学意义(=0.005)。然而,仅早期IM组与其他组有显著差异(<0.05),晚期IM组与WBR组、钛网组与线缝组之间无显著差异(>0.05)。4组在骨愈合率、并发症及相邻关节功能恢复方面无显著差异(>.05)。有4例骨不连和延迟愈合,均由植骨量或质量差、植骨或内固定不稳定所致。
IM技术和WBG技术均是修复节段性骨缺损的有效方法。早期IM除机械包裹外还有生物性成骨。然而,机械包裹是修复骨缺损的共同基础,生物性成骨可促进骨愈合。