OBJECTIVES: To compare retrograde versus antegrade femoral bone graft harvesting using the reamer-irrigator-aspirator system to determine whether there was any difference in intraoperative, postoperative, or patient outcome variables. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Urban Level I Trauma Center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Ninety-four (62 antegrade and 32 retrograde procedures) consecutive adult patients who underwent femoral autologous bone graft harvesting using the Synthes reamer-irrigator-aspirator system between April 2008 and March 2013. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Amount of bone graft, perioperative fractures or other complications, and postoperative hip and/or knee pain. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between demographic or medical comorbidities between the groups. There was no significant difference in the side of the graft harvest, graft volume, hospital length of stay, or the ability to ambulate on postoperative day 1. There was a significantly increased incidence of iatrogenic fracture or prophylactic nailing with antegrade reaming (4 vs. 0, P = 0.01). Average length of follow-up was 500 (range, 20-1477) days for the antegrade group and 378 (range, 19-706) days for the retrograde group. The antegrade group had a nonsignificant increased incidence of hip pain (8.1% vs. 3.1%, P = 0.66), and the retrograde group had a significantly higher incidence of knee pain (15.6% vs. 1.6%, P = 0.02) at 6-month follow-up. Neither hip nor knee complaints were present at final follow-up. No cases of delayed femur fracture, infection, or abductor and/or antalgic gait involving the donor extremity were seen at final follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides support to the safety of femoral bone graft harvesting using both antegrade and retrograde techniques. Both techniques provide reliable, high-volume, nonstructural autologous bone graft with minimal associated morbidity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
OBJECTIVES: To compare retrograde versus antegrade femoral bone graft harvesting using the reamer-irrigator-aspirator system to determine whether there was any difference in intraoperative, postoperative, or patient outcome variables. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Urban Level I Trauma Center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: Ninety-four (62 antegrade and 32 retrograde procedures) consecutive adult patients who underwent femoral autologous bone graft harvesting using the Synthes reamer-irrigator-aspirator system between April 2008 and March 2013. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Amount of bone graft, perioperative fractures or other complications, and postoperative hip and/or knee pain. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between demographic or medical comorbidities between the groups. There was no significant difference in the side of the graft harvest, graft volume, hospital length of stay, or the ability to ambulate on postoperative day 1. There was a significantly increased incidence of iatrogenic fracture or prophylactic nailing with antegrade reaming (4 vs. 0, P = 0.01). Average length of follow-up was 500 (range, 20-1477) days for the antegrade group and 378 (range, 19-706) days for the retrograde group. The antegrade group had a nonsignificant increased incidence of hip pain (8.1% vs. 3.1%, P = 0.66), and the retrograde group had a significantly higher incidence of knee pain (15.6% vs. 1.6%, P = 0.02) at 6-month follow-up. Neither hip nor knee complaints were present at final follow-up. No cases of delayed femur fracture, infection, or abductor and/or antalgic gait involving the donor extremity were seen at final follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides support to the safety of femoral bone graft harvesting using both antegrade and retrograde techniques. Both techniques provide reliable, high-volume, nonstructural autologous bone graft with minimal associated morbidity. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Authors: Markus Laubach; Lucas P Weimer; Felix M Bläsius; Frank Hildebrand; Philipp Kobbe; Dietmar W Hutmacher Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Date: 2022-09-17 Impact factor: 2.928