Autograft, allograft and bone substitutes in reconstructive orthopedic surgery

Abstract

Reconstruction of bone defects is a challenge for all orthopedic surgeons worldwide; to overcome this problem there are different options: the use of autografts, allografts and bone substitutes (BSs) to enhance and accelerate bone repair. Autografts have excellent biological properties but are associated with morbidity of the donor site and are restricted in volume. Allografts are available in adequate quantity but concerns still remain about the risk of infections, moreover they do not have osteogenetic properties. Bone substitutes have different indications and are very attractive for orthopedic surgeons. The present paper briefly reviews the advantages and disadvantages of autografts, allografts and BSs for bone reconstruction.

Synergistic effect of extracellularly supplemented osteopontin and osteocalcin on stem cell proliferation, osteogenic differentiation, and angiogenic properties

“…In fact, the treatment of bone loss has dramatically increased in the last decades, especially due to the large number of bone-related medical conditions that require clinical interventions and due to the dramatic growth of an aging population. 2 In particular, the scarcity of bone graft donors, as well as the high risk of immunologic rejection and infection limited the clinical use of allografts. 1 Moreover, for 5% to 10% of individuals with a broken bone, the fracture will fail to heal under the usual treatment, causing nonunion bone fractures.…”

Bone repair of critical size defects treated with autogenic, allogenic, or xenogenic bone grafts alone or in combination with rhBMP‐2

“…Bone grafting and especially the bone graft substitutes have been widely used in clinical practice for this purpose (Chiarello et al. ). Thus, the use of grafts and growth factors is relevant in clinical conditions such as bone defects caused by congenital factors, trauma, or surgery (Peres & Lamano ).…”

Bioglass and bioceramic composites processed by Spark Plasma Sintering (SPS): biological evaluation Versus SBF test

“…Autograft and allograft reconstructions, where bone tissue is taken from the patient itself or from donors, respectively, are among the strategies commonly used for bone regeneration. Both procedures have their inherent shortages, associated for example to immune responses and disease transmission risks for allografts, donor site morbidity, pain and limited tissue availability for autografts [1][2][3]. During the last four decades, a variety of synthetic alternatives to be employed as bone graft substitutes has been developed, with the aim of minimizing these complications.…”