BENİGN KİSTİK LEZYONLARI VE KAYNAMA YOKLUĞU OLAN HASTALARDA DONDURULARAK KURUTULMUŞ KEMİK ALLOGREFTLERİ İLE DEMİNERALİZE KEMİK MATRİKS KOMBİNASYONUNUN ALLOGREFTLERLE KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI

Amaç Bu çalışmanın amacı, kaynama yokluğu görülen ve benign kistik lezyonu olan olgularda, kortikospongioz kurutulup dondurulmuş allogreft (AG) ile Demineralize Kemik Matriks (DBM) kombinasyonun uygulandığı hastalar ile yalnız AG uygulanan hastaların klinik ve radyolojik sonuçlarını karşılaştırmaktır. Gereç ve Yöntem Retrospektif olarak olarak planlanan bu çalışmaya kırık sonrası kaynama yokluğu gelişen (nonunion) ve benign kistik lezyonu olan, operasyon sırasında DBM ve/veya allogreft kullanılan ve radyolojik ve klinik takibi yapılan hastalar alındı. Benign kistik lezyonu olan hastalar Grup I’e, nonunion tanısı alan hastalar Grup II’ye dahil edildi. Grup I ve Grup II hastalar kullanılan greft türlerine göre A ve B olmak üzere iki alt gruba ayrıldı. DBM-AG uygulanan hastalar A grubuna, sadece AG uygulanan hastalar ise B grubuna alındı. Greftin görünümü ve kaynama potansiyelini için, Goldberg’in radyolojik değerlendirme skalası kullanıldı. Bulgular Çalışmaya 101 hasta alındı. Grup I’e 48 hasta, grup II’ye 53 hasta alındı. Grup IA ve Grup IB karşılaştırıldığında radyolojik değerlendirmede skor açısından anlamlı fark bulundu (p=0.011). Grup IIA ve Grup IIB karşılaştırıldığında skor açısından aralarında anlamlı fark bulundu (p=0.014). Grup IA ve IIA skorları istatistiksel olarak anlamlı derecede yüksek bulundu. Sonuç Otogreftlerin yetersiz olduğu olgularda allogreftler kullanılabilir. Kullanılan allogreftler, DBM ile karıştırılıp kullanıldığında klinik ve radyolojik olarak hem daha iyi, hem de daha hızlı kaynama elde edilebilir.

COMPARISON OF FREEZE-DRIED BONE ALLOGRAFTS AND DEMINERALIZED BONE MATRIX COMBINATION TO ALLOGRAFTS IN PATIENTS WITH BENIGN CYSTIC LESIONS AND NONUNIONS

ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the clinical and radiological results of the patients who treated the combination of Corticospongiosis dried and frozen allograft(AG) with a Demineralized Bone Matrix (DBM) andthe patients who treated AG in the patients who hadbenign cystic lesions (BCLs) and nonunion.Materials and MethodsThis retrospective study included patients who hadBCLs and nonunion, who underwent DBM and/or AGduring the operation, and who followed radiologically and clinically. Patients with BCLs were included inGroup I and the patients with nonunion were includedin Group II. Group I and Group II patients were divided into two groups as A and B. Patients who treatedDBM-AG were included in group A and those who treated AG were included in group B. Goldberg’s radiological evaluation scale was used to evaluate the graftappearance and its union potential.ResultsIn this study, 101 patients were included.48 patientsin group I and 53 patients in group II were included.When comparing Group IA with Group IB, there was asignificant difference in terms of their radiological scores (p=0.011). When comparing Group IIA with GroupIIB, there was a significant difference in terms of theirradiological scores (p=0.014). The Group IA and IIAscores were statistically significantly higher.ConclusionIn the treatment of BCLs and nonunion,the AG-DBMcombination is more effective than AG alone as clinically and radiologically.

PDF

___

1. Bigham AS, Dehghani SN, Shafiei Z, Torabi Nezhad S. Xenogenic demineralized bone matrix and fresh autogenous cortical bone J Orthop Traumatol. 2008 Jun; 9 (2): 73-80. doi: 10.1007/s10195-008-0006-6. Epub 2008 May 10.
2. Sethi AK,Kar IB, Mohanty T, Mishra N, Singh AK. Use of plasma-enriched demineralized freeze-dried bone matrix in postsurgical jaw defects. Natl J Maxillofac Surg. 2018 JulDec;9(2):174-183.doi: 10.4103/njms.NJMS_33_18.
3. Durmuş AS, Çeribaşı AO, Can HN. Chorale and Demineralized Bone Matrix Effects on Bone Iodine Equation. F.ü.sağ.bil.vet. derg. 2016; 30 (2): 131 – 136
4. Baldwin P, Li DJ, Auston DA, Mir HS, Yoon RS, Koval KJ. Autograft, allograft, and bone graft substitutes: clinical evidence and indications for use in the setting of orthopaedic trauma surgery.J Orthop Trauma. 2019 Apr;33(4):203-213.doi: 10.1097/ BOT.0000000000001420.
5. Behfarnia P, Shahabooei M, Mashhadiabbas F, Fakhari E. Comparison of bone regeneration using three demineralized freeze-dried bone allografts: A histological and histomorphometric study in rabbit calvaria. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2012 Sep;9(5):554-60.doi: 10.4103/1735-3327.104873.
6. Kaya Y, Şahin S. Application of Demineralized Frozen Dried Bone Allografts in Periodontal Bone Defects and Recent Developments Journal of Hacettepe University Faculty of Dentistry Volume: 34, Issue: 1-2, Pages: 37-45, 2010
7. Sheikh Z, Sima C, Glogauer M. Bone Replacement Materials and Techniques Used for Achieving Vertical Alveolar Bone Augmentation. Materials (Basel). 2015 Jun; 8(6): 2953–2993.Published online 2015 May 27. doi: 10.3390/ma8062953
8. Antonio Scarrano, Marco Degidi, Giovanna Iezzi, Gabriele Pecora, Maurizio Piattelli + .Maxillary sinus augmentation with different biomaterials: A comparative histologic and histomorphometric study in man.Implant Dent2006 Jun;15(2):197207. doi:10.1097/01.id.0000220120.54308.f3.
9. Lareau CR, Deren ME, Fantry A, Donahue RM, DiGiovanni CW. Does autogenous bone graft work? A logistic regression analysis. Foot Ankle Surg. 2015 Sep; 21 (3): 150-9.doi: 10.1016/j.fas.2015.03.008. Epub 2015 Apr 8.
10. Bigham AS, Dehghani SN, Shafiei Z, Nezhad ST. Experimental bone: Defect healing with xenogenic bone and bovine fetal growth Plate as a New Xenograft: Radiological, Histopathological and Biomechanical Evaluation.Cell Tissue Bank. 2009 Feb; 10 (1): 33-41. doi: 10.1007/s10561-008-9107-y. Epub 2008 Sep 23.
11. Y. Fillingham, J. Jacobs Bone grafts and their substitutes. Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):6–9. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.98B.36350.
12. Jorgenson SS, Lowe TG, France J, Sabin J. A prospective analysis of autograft versus allograft. A minimum of 1-year follow-up in 144 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1994 Sep 15;19(18):2048-53. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199409150-00005.
13. Flier MA, Smith WR, Mauffrey C, Irgit K, Williams AE, Ross E,+ .Out of employees and complication rates. J Orthop Surg and Res. 2013 Sep 9; 8:33.
14. Garg NK, Gam S: Percutaneous autogenous bone marrow grafting in congenital tibial pseudarthrosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1995 Sep;77(5):830-1. PMID: 7559719
15. J J Tiedeman , K L Garvin, T A Kile, J F Connolly. The Role of a Composite, Demineralized Bone Matrix and Bone Marrow in the Treatment of Osseous Defects.Orthopedics. 1995 Dec;18(12):1153-8. PMID: 8749293
16. Upto J, J Glowackl. Hand reconstruction with allograft demineralized bone: twenty-six implants in twelve patients. J Hand Surg Am. 1992 Jul;17(4):704-13.doi: 10.1016/0363- 5023(92)90321-f.
17. Vaccaro AR, Stubbs HA, Block JE. Demineralized Bone Matrix Composite Grafting for Posterolateral Spinal Fusion. Orthopedics. 2007 Jul; 30 (7): 567-70. doi: 10.3928/01477447- 20070701-06.
18. Cammisa FP Jr , Lowery G, Garfin SR, Geisler FH, Klara PM, McGuire RA, Sassard WR,+. Two-year Fusion Rate Equivalency Between Grafton DBM Gel and Autograft in Posterolateral Spine Fusion: A Prospective Controlled Trial Employing a Side-By-Side Comparison in the Same Patient. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2004 Mar 15;29(6):660-6.doi: 10.1097/01. brs.0000116588.17129.b9.
19. Buser Z, Brodke DS, Youssef JA, Rometsch E, Park JB, Yoon ST6 +. Allograft Versus Demineralized Bone Matrix in Instrumented and Noninstrumented Lumbar Fusion: A Systematic Review. Global Spine J. 2018 Jun;8(4):396-412. doi: 10.1177/2192568217735342. Epub 2017 Oct 25.
20. Tricot M , Deleu PA , Detrembleur C, Leemrijse T. Clinical Assessment of 115 Cases of Hindfoot Fusion With Two Different Types of Graft: Allograft+DBM+bone Marrow Aspirate Versus autograft+DBM. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2017 Sep;103(5):697-702.doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2017.03.014. Epub 2017 Apr 15.
21. Kulachote N, Sa-ngasoongsong P, Sirisreetreerux N, Chanplakorn P, Fuangfa P, Suphachatwong C +. Demineralized Bone Matrix Add-On for Acceleration of Bone Healing in Atypical Subtrochanteric Femoral Fracture: A Consecutive Case-Control Study. Biomed Res Int.2016;2016:4061539. doi: 10.1155/2016/4061539. Epub 2016 Feb 28.
22. Di Bella C, Dozza B, Frisoni T, Cevolani L, Donati D. Injection of Demineralized Bone Matrix With Bone Marrow Concentrate Improves Healing in Unicameral Bone Cyst. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010 Nov;468(11):3047-55. doi: 10.1007/s11999-010- 1430-5.
23. Rougraff BT1, Kling TJ. Treatment of Active Unicameral Bone Cysts With Percutaneous Injection of Demineralized Bone Matrix and Autogenous Bone Marrow.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002 Jun;84(6):921-9.doi: 10.2106/00004623-200206000-00005.
24. Cho HS, Seo SH, Park SH, Park JH, Shin DS, Park IH. Minimal invasive surgery for unicameral bone cyst using demineralized bone matrix: a case series. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2012 Jul 29;13:134. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-13-134.
25. Gazdag AR, Lane JM, Glaser D, Forster RA. Alternatives to autogenous bone graft: efficacy and indications. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 1995 Jan;3(1):1-8.doi: 10.5435/00124635- 199501000-00001.