Donor site morbidity in autologous bone grafting – A comparison between different techniques of anterior iliac crest bone harvesting: A prospective study

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study is to compare morbidities at the donor site in autologous bone harvesting from an anterior iliac crest via the outer cortex, inner cortex and table splitting technique. Methods: The randomized, prospective and comparative study was conducted in 60 patients who were treated with bone grafting as a part of their treatment plan. Group A underwent the outer cortex technique (20 patients), Group B underwent the inner cortex technique (20 patients) and Group C underwent the table splitting technique (20 patients). The comparison of morbidities associated with various techniques of anterior iliac crest bone graft harvesting was done for a period of one year. Results: Most common morbidity observed was pain, measured by the visual analogue scale score (60/60, 100% of patients). The visual analogue scale score was significantly higher for the outer cortex group followed by the inner cortex group, and then the lowest score was for the table splitting group ( p < 0.05). Followed by numbness (40/60, 66%), least in the table splitting group and maximum in the outer cortex group ( p < 0.05). Next was abnormal gait, which was mostly seen in patients with the outer table method and least in the table split group ( p < 0.05). Other complications were infections (4), itching at the surgical site (3) and hematoma (1). There were no significant difference regarding scar satisfaction among comparison groups. Conclusion: we conclude that few differences do exist in harvest-site morbidities between different techniques used in our study. Overall, the most common morbidity observed were pain, numbness and abnormal gait. However, the table splitting group has the lowest morbidity, therefore bone harvesting by the table splitting appears to be a very good option.

Repairing a critical cranial defect using WISP1-pretreated chondrocyte scaffolds

“… 1 One disadvantage of this procedure is the risk for donor site morbidity following autologous bone grafting, commonly resulting in pain and numbness of the site. 2 Implant site morbidity may occur if the graft micro-vessels are not surgically sutured to supply blood to the graft. As such, alternative approaches have been employed to regain bone volume in the defect site.…”

Restoration of Severe Bone and Soft Tissue Atrophy by Means of a Xenogenic Bone Sheet (Flex Cortical Sheet): A Case Report

“…The ridge defect was reconstructed with the bone graft mix. Fibrin glue plays a key role in this kind of GBR because it increases the stability of the grafts [23]. Following small, consecutive increases of the grafts, the FCS was accurately placed on top of the ridge to create the desired shape.…”

“…The bone sheet has also been used successfully in other cranial applications like the reconstruction of the orbital floor and the reparation of the sinus wall combined with zygomatic implants [20][21][22]. Recently, a new generation of FCS has been introduced to the market, with a machine-made thickness of 0.2, 0.5, and 0.9 mm and increased flexibility and adaptability to ridge defects [23].…”

Modeling the Osteogenic Potential of Decellularized Human Bone Particles by Tuning their Size Distribution Through a Sonic Microfragmentation Approach

“…Donor site morbidity is reported in almost 9% of the patients, including but not limited to major complications such as infection, prolonged wound drainage, large hematomas, and reoperation. [ 10–12 ] In addition, in some cases, in which the tissue that can be harvested from the patient cannot cover the bone defects, is not a feasible option. [ 13 ]…”

“…Donor site morbidity is reported in almost 9% of the patients, including but not limited to major complications such as infection, prolonged wound drainage, large hematomas, and reoperation. [10][11][12] In addition, in some cases, in which the tissue that can be harvested from the patient cannot cover the bone defects, is not a feasible option. [13] To overcome the limitations of autograft transplantation, researchers and biomedical manufacturers have made significant efforts to develop biomaterials that mimic the properties of autograft.…”