Literature DB >> 18301928

Influence of decortication of the recipient graft bed on graft integration and tissue neoformation in the graft-recipient bed interface.

Fabiano R T Canto1, Sergio B Garcia, João P M Issa, Anderson Marin, Elaine A Del Bel, Helton L A Defino.   

Abstract

The objective of the present study was to assess the influence of decortication of the posterior elements of the vertebra (recipient bed) and the nature of the bone graft (cortical or cancellous bone) on graft integration and bone, cartilage and fiber neoformation in the interface between the vertebral recipient bed and the bone graft. Seventy-two male Wistar rats were divided into four experimental groups according to the presence or absence of decortication of the posterior vertebral elements and the use of a cortical or cancellous bone graft. Group I--the posterior elements were decorticated and cancellous bone used. Group II--the posterior elements were decorticated and cortical graft was used. Group III--the posterior elements were not decorticated and cancellous graft was used. Group IV--the posterior elements were not decorticated and cortical graft was used. The animals were killed 3, 6 and 9 weeks after surgery and the interface between the posterior elements and the bone graft was subjected to histomorphometric evaluation. Mean percent neoformed bone was 40.8% in group I (decortication and cancellous graft), 39.13% in group II (decortication and cortical graft), 6.13% in group III (non-decorticated and cancellous graft), and 9.27% in group IV (non-decorticated and cortical graft) for animals killed at 3 weeks (P = 0.0005). For animals killed at 6 weeks, the mean percent was 38.53% for group I, 40.40% for group II, 10.27% for group III, and 7.6% for group IV (P = 0.0005), and for animals killed at 9 weeks, the mean was 25.93% for group I, 30.6% for group II, 16.4% for group III, and 18.73% for group IV (P = 0.0026). The mean percent neoformed cartilage tissue was 8.36% for group I, 7.46% for group II, 11.1% for group III, and 9.13% for group IV for the animals killed at 3 weeks (P = 0.6544); 6.6% for group I, 8.07% for group, 7.47% for group III and 6.13% for group IV (P = 0.4889) for animals killed at 6 weeks, and 3.13% for group I, 4.06% for group II, 10.53% for group III and 12.07% for group IV (P = 0.0006) for animals killed at 9 weeks. Mean percent neoformed fibrous tissue was 11% for group I, 6.13% for group II, 26.27% for group III and 21.87% for group IV for animals killed at 3 weeks (P = 0.0008); 7.67% for group I, 7.1% for group II, 9.8% for group III and 10.4% for group IV (P = 0.7880) for animals killed at 6 weeks, and 3.73% for group I, 4.4% for group II, 6.67% for group III and 6.8% for group IV (P = 0.0214) for animals killed at 9 weeks. The statistically significant differences in percent tissue formation were related to decortication of the posterior elements. The use of a cortical or cancellous graft did not influence tissue neoformation. Ossification in the interface of the recipient graft bed was of the intramembranous type in the decorticated animals and endochondral type in the non-decorticated animals.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18301928      PMCID: PMC2367425          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-008-0642-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  14 in total

Review 1.  Overview of the biology of lumbar spine fusion and principles for selecting a bone graft substitute.

Authors:  Scott D Boden
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2002-08-15       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Characterization of a developing lumbar arthrodesis in a sheep model with quantitative instability.

Authors:  Mark R Foster; Matthew J Allen; Joanne E Schoonmaker; Hansen A Yuan; Atsunori Kanazawa; Soo-An Park; Baowei Liu
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2002 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.166

Review 3.  Bone grafting alternatives in spinal surgery.

Authors:  Alexander R Vaccaro; Kazuhiro Chiba; John G Heller; Tushar Ch Patel; John S Thalgott; Eeric Truumees; Jeffrey S Fischgrund; Matthew R Craig; Scott C Berta; Jeffrey C Wang
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2002 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.166

4.  Experimental spinal fusion with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 without decortication of osseous elements.

Authors:  H S Sandhu; L E Kanim; J M Toth; J M Kabo; D Liu; R B Delamarter; E G Dawson
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1997-06-01       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Video-assisted lateral intertransverse process arthrodesis. Validation of a new minimally invasive lumbar spinal fusion technique in the rabbit and nonhuman primate (rhesus) models.

Authors:  S D Boden; P A Moskovitz; M A Morone; Y Toribitake
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1996-11-15       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  The biology of bone graft repair.

Authors:  H Burchardt
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1983-04       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Ne-Osteo bone growth factor for posterolateral lumbar spine fusion: results from a nonhuman primate study and a prospective human clinical pilot study.

Authors:  Scott D Boden; Dieter Grob; Christopher Damien
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2004-03-01       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Osseointegration of autograft versus osteogenic protein-1 in posterolateral spinal arthrodesis: emphasis on the comparative mechanisms of bone induction.

Authors:  Bryan W Cunningham; Norimichi Shimamoto; John C Sefter; Anton E Dmitriev; Carlos M Orbegoso; Edward F McCarthy; Ira L Fedder; Paul C McAfee
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2002 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 4.166

9.  An experimental lumbar intertransverse process spinal fusion model. Radiographic, histologic, and biomechanical healing characteristics.

Authors:  S D Boden; J H Schimandle; W C Hutton
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1995-02-15       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Practical stereological methods for morphometric cytology.

Authors:  E R Weibel; G S Kistler; W F Scherle
Journal:  J Cell Biol       Date:  1966-07       Impact factor: 10.539

View more
  3 in total

1.  Effects of the combination of low-level laser irradiation and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 in bone repair.

Authors:  Anderson Paim Rosa; Luiz Gustavo de Sousa; Simone Cecilio Hallak Regalo; João Paulo Mardegan Issa; Ana Paula Amorim Barbosa; Dimitrius Leonardo Pitol; Richard Honorato de Oliveira; Paulo Batista de Vasconcelos; Fernando José Dias; Daniela Thomazatti Chimello; Selma Siéssere
Journal:  Lasers Med Sci       Date:  2011-11-18       Impact factor: 3.161

2.  Mechanisms of guided bone regeneration: a review.

Authors:  Jie Liu; David G Kerns
Journal:  Open Dent J       Date:  2014-05-16

3.  Evaluation of tissue ingrowth and reaction of a porous polyethylene block as an onlay bone graft in rabbit posterior mandible.

Authors:  Teerapan Sosakul; Pongsatorn Tuchpramuk; Waraporn Suvannapruk; Autcharaporn Srion; Bunyong Rungroungdouyboon; Jintamai Suwanprateeb
Journal:  J Periodontal Implant Sci       Date:  2020-03-19       Impact factor: 2.614

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.