The Effects of Nonvascularized Versus Vascularized Bone Grafting on Calvarial Defect Healing

Power, Stephanie; Matic, Damir B.; Holdsworth, David W.

doi:10.1097/scs.0000000000001241

Cited by 8 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This results in less bone resorption and improvement in healing potential. 3,4 Revascularization of necrotic bone and healing in relatively avascular soft-tissue beds (eg, irradiated fields) are additional benefits of maintaining vascularity. 4 Although clinical reports of VBGs demonstrated variable rates of success, most reflect the benefits demonstrated in in vitro studies and animal models.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vascularized Bone Grafts in Orthopaedic Surgery: A Review of Options and Indications

Archual

Bishop

Shin

2021

J Am Acad Orthop Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vascularized bone grafts have demonstrated increased perfusion, structural integrity, and ability to achieve good outcomes in challenging clinical situations when compared with nonvascularized grafts. These grafts may be pedicled or free, and bring perfused, viable bone into areas of impaired healing. Although numerous grafts have been described, a few grafts have demonstrated particular usefulness and versatility. Pedicled grafts from the distal radius, medial femoral condyle, ribs, and fibula have improved outcomes in challenging situations without the need for microsurgery. Free grafts from the fibula and medial femoral condyle/trochlea, although they require microsurgical anastomosis, can be transferred to virtually any site in the body and have expanding indications. The capacity of these grafts to achieve favorable outcomes in difficult cases make them a powerful tool for orthopaedic surgeons to have in their armamentarium.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%