开放式楔形高胫骨截骨术中的骨替代物骨折:两种不同骨替代物的比较

Ryuichi Nakamura , Masaki Amemiya , Kaori Matsumoto , Ippei Yoshida , Fumiyoshi Kawashima , Tomoyuki Shimakawa , Akira Okano
{"title":"开放式楔形高胫骨截骨术中的骨替代物骨折:两种不同骨替代物的比较","authors":"Ryuichi Nakamura ,&nbsp;Masaki Amemiya ,&nbsp;Kaori Matsumoto ,&nbsp;Ippei Yoshida ,&nbsp;Fumiyoshi Kawashima ,&nbsp;Tomoyuki Shimakawa ,&nbsp;Akira Okano","doi":"10.1016/j.jjoisr.2024.04.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>The aim of this study was to retrospectively compare bone substitute fracture patterns and outcomes in patients who underwent open wedge high tibial osteotomy (OWHTO) with OSferion60 or OSferion60 Marvelous bone substitutes. Patients with and without bone substitute fractures were compared and risk factors for bone substitute fracture were identified.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Included patients were physically active non-smokers with knee osteoarthritis and deformity in the proximal tibia, persistent pain, and &lt;5° of flexion contracture. OWHTO was performed with a TriS plate and a target femorotibial angle (FTA) of 170°. Full weight-bearing began the day after surgery. Pre-, intra-, and post-operative evaluations of demographic, clinical, and radiological factors were performed. Regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for bone substitute fracture.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Data for 63 patients were analyzed (OSferion60, <em>n</em> ​= ​28 and Marvelous, <em>n</em> ​= ​35; bone substitute fracture, <em>n</em> ​= ​32 and non-bone substitute fracture, <em>n</em> ​= ​31). No significant differences were found between the bone substitute groups in patient characteristics and pre-operative and 2-year FTA, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, and flexion range. FTA and JOA scores improved significantly 2 years post-operatively (both <em>p</em> ​&lt; ​0.001). There were 32 bone substitute fractures (OSferion60, <em>n</em> ​= ​20; Marvelous, <em>n</em> ​= ​12); all occurred by the 1-month follow-up. Gap filling occurred significantly earlier in the Marvelous group versus the OSferion60 group (<em>p</em> ​&lt; ​0.001). Risk factors for bone substitute fracture were weaker bone substitute [odds ratio (OR) ​= ​8.34; <em>p</em> ​&lt; ​0.001] and lateral hinge fracture (OR ​= ​11.7; <em>p</em> ​= ​0.045).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Although bone substitute fracture was common in both bone substitute groups, this did not affect outcomes. However, lateral hinge fractures are a particular concern.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100795,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Joint Surgery and Research","volume":"2 2","pages":"Pages 58-65"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949705124000082/pdfft?md5=246ad172bee1d2a8f9b002f99a2ac6bc&pid=1-s2.0-S2949705124000082-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bone substitute fracture in open wedge high tibial osteotomy: Comparison of two different bone substitutes\",\"authors\":\"Ryuichi Nakamura ,&nbsp;Masaki Amemiya ,&nbsp;Kaori Matsumoto ,&nbsp;Ippei Yoshida ,&nbsp;Fumiyoshi Kawashima ,&nbsp;Tomoyuki Shimakawa ,&nbsp;Akira Okano\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jjoisr.2024.04.002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>The aim of this study was to retrospectively compare bone substitute fracture patterns and outcomes in patients who underwent open wedge high tibial osteotomy (OWHTO) with OSferion60 or OSferion60 Marvelous bone substitutes. Patients with and without bone substitute fractures were compared and risk factors for bone substitute fracture were identified.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Included patients were physically active non-smokers with knee osteoarthritis and deformity in the proximal tibia, persistent pain, and &lt;5° of flexion contracture. OWHTO was performed with a TriS plate and a target femorotibial angle (FTA) of 170°. Full weight-bearing began the day after surgery. Pre-, intra-, and post-operative evaluations of demographic, clinical, and radiological factors were performed. Regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for bone substitute fracture.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Data for 63 patients were analyzed (OSferion60, <em>n</em> ​= ​28 and Marvelous, <em>n</em> ​= ​35; bone substitute fracture, <em>n</em> ​= ​32 and non-bone substitute fracture, <em>n</em> ​= ​31). No significant differences were found between the bone substitute groups in patient characteristics and pre-operative and 2-year FTA, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, and flexion range. FTA and JOA scores improved significantly 2 years post-operatively (both <em>p</em> ​&lt; ​0.001). There were 32 bone substitute fractures (OSferion60, <em>n</em> ​= ​20; Marvelous, <em>n</em> ​= ​12); all occurred by the 1-month follow-up. Gap filling occurred significantly earlier in the Marvelous group versus the OSferion60 group (<em>p</em> ​&lt; ​0.001). Risk factors for bone substitute fracture were weaker bone substitute [odds ratio (OR) ​= ​8.34; <em>p</em> ​&lt; ​0.001] and lateral hinge fracture (OR ​= ​11.7; <em>p</em> ​= ​0.045).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Although bone substitute fracture was common in both bone substitute groups, this did not affect outcomes. However, lateral hinge fractures are a particular concern.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100795,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Joint Surgery and Research\",\"volume\":\"2 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 58-65\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949705124000082/pdfft?md5=246ad172bee1d2a8f9b002f99a2ac6bc&pid=1-s2.0-S2949705124000082-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Joint Surgery and Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949705124000082\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Joint Surgery and Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949705124000082","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的 本研究旨在回顾性比较使用 OSferion60 或 OSferion60 Marvelous 骨替代物进行开放式楔形高胫骨截骨术(OWHTO)的患者的骨替代物骨折模式和预后。方法纳入的患者均为身体活跃的非吸烟者,患有膝关节骨性关节炎,胫骨近端畸形,持续疼痛,屈曲挛缩5°。OWHTO采用TriS钢板,目标股胫夹角(FTA)为170°。术后第二天开始完全负重。对人口统计学、临床和放射学因素进行了术前、术中和术后评估。对 63 名患者的数据进行了分析(OSferion60,28 人;Marvelous,35 人;骨替代物骨折,32 人;非骨替代物骨折,31 人)。在患者特征、术前和 2 年 FTA、日本骨科协会(JOA)评分和屈曲范围方面,骨替代物组之间没有发现明显差异。术后 2 年,FTA 和 JOA 评分均有明显改善(P 均为 0.001)。共有 32 例骨替代物骨折(OSferion60,20 例;Marvelous,12 例),所有骨折都发生在 1 个月的随访期间。Marvelous组发生间隙填充的时间明显早于OSferion60组(p <0.001)。骨替代物骨折的风险因素是较弱的骨替代物[比值比 (OR) = 8.34; p <0.001]和侧铰链骨折(OR = 11.7; p = 0.045)。然而,外侧铰链骨折尤其令人担忧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Bone substitute fracture in open wedge high tibial osteotomy: Comparison of two different bone substitutes

Purpose

The aim of this study was to retrospectively compare bone substitute fracture patterns and outcomes in patients who underwent open wedge high tibial osteotomy (OWHTO) with OSferion60 or OSferion60 Marvelous bone substitutes. Patients with and without bone substitute fractures were compared and risk factors for bone substitute fracture were identified.

Methods

Included patients were physically active non-smokers with knee osteoarthritis and deformity in the proximal tibia, persistent pain, and <5° of flexion contracture. OWHTO was performed with a TriS plate and a target femorotibial angle (FTA) of 170°. Full weight-bearing began the day after surgery. Pre-, intra-, and post-operative evaluations of demographic, clinical, and radiological factors were performed. Regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for bone substitute fracture.

Results

Data for 63 patients were analyzed (OSferion60, n ​= ​28 and Marvelous, n ​= ​35; bone substitute fracture, n ​= ​32 and non-bone substitute fracture, n ​= ​31). No significant differences were found between the bone substitute groups in patient characteristics and pre-operative and 2-year FTA, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, and flexion range. FTA and JOA scores improved significantly 2 years post-operatively (both p ​< ​0.001). There were 32 bone substitute fractures (OSferion60, n ​= ​20; Marvelous, n ​= ​12); all occurred by the 1-month follow-up. Gap filling occurred significantly earlier in the Marvelous group versus the OSferion60 group (p ​< ​0.001). Risk factors for bone substitute fracture were weaker bone substitute [odds ratio (OR) ​= ​8.34; p ​< ​0.001] and lateral hinge fracture (OR ​= ​11.7; p ​= ​0.045).

Conclusions

Although bone substitute fracture was common in both bone substitute groups, this did not affect outcomes. However, lateral hinge fractures are a particular concern.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Development of a wearable system to estimate knee adduction moment of patients with knee osteoarthritis during gait using a single inertial measurement unit Evaluation of early implant failure in Japanese patients undergoing unrestricted kinematic alignment total knee arthroplasty Prevention of surgical site infection: need to focus on the enemy within Appreciation to reviewers in 2024 Therapeutic strategies for periprosthetic femoral fractures based on three classification systems
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1