Sukhmin Singh1, Aman Verma1, Aakriti Jain1, Tarun Goyal2, Pankaj Kandwal3, Shobha S Arora3. 1. Department of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, India. 2. Department of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Bathinda, 151001, Punjab, India. 3. Department of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249001, India.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The bone bank unit of interest in this article was established in January 2018, in a tertiary care teaching institute of north India. Aim of this article is to describe the sources of allografts obtained, discard rates of allografts and infection rates in the recipients after use. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All the relevant details of donors and recipients were maintained, and donors were screened for standard inclusion and exclusion criteria before obtaining the grafts. Aerobic culture was performed before storage and just prior to use. Samples with incomplete documentation, incomplete donor screening or positive cultures were discarded. Data on surgical site infection in recipients was collected from hospital records retrospectively. Initially ELISA based serological tests were used for screening. Donor has to undergo these tests again after 6 months to account for the window period of proliferation of viruses. Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) for these viral agents were introduced in the hospital in May 2018. RESULTS: Allografts from a total of 196 donors were obtained in the bone bank over 2 years. Major source of bone was femoral heads harvested during total hip arthroplasty or hemi-arthroplasty. 44(22.4%) grafts had to be discarded. 95 allografts were used in 88 patients during this time. Most common indication for use was surgery for bone tumors (40%), followed by complex primary or revision arthroplasty (30.5%). Three (3.4%) recipients developed deep infection postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Frozen allograft bone from hospital based bone banks is a reliable source of allografts. When meticulous precautions for sterility are followed, risk of infection is low. Monitoring of such bone banks should fall within a framework of the local legislature. Incomplete documentation is the major reason for wastage of the samples obtained. NAAT may be useful in screening of donors, as it reduces the wastage and the holding time of the allografts.
BACKGROUND: The bone bank unit of interest in this article was established in January 2018, in a tertiary care teaching institute of north India. Aim of this article is to describe the sources of allografts obtained, discard rates of allografts and infection rates in the recipients after use. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All the relevant details of donors and recipients were maintained, and donors were screened for standard inclusion and exclusion criteria before obtaining the grafts. Aerobic culture was performed before storage and just prior to use. Samples with incomplete documentation, incomplete donor screening or positive cultures were discarded. Data on surgical site infection in recipients was collected from hospital records retrospectively. Initially ELISA based serological tests were used for screening. Donor has to undergo these tests again after 6 months to account for the window period of proliferation of viruses. Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) for these viral agents were introduced in the hospital in May 2018. RESULTS: Allografts from a total of 196 donors were obtained in the bone bank over 2 years. Major source of bone was femoral heads harvested during total hip arthroplasty or hemi-arthroplasty. 44(22.4%) grafts had to be discarded. 95 allografts were used in 88 patients during this time. Most common indication for use was surgery for bone tumors (40%), followed by complex primary or revision arthroplasty (30.5%). Three (3.4%) recipients developed deep infection postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Frozen allograft bone from hospital based bone banks is a reliable source of allografts. When meticulous precautions for sterility are followed, risk of infection is low. Monitoring of such bone banks should fall within a framework of the local legislature. Incomplete documentation is the major reason for wastage of the samples obtained. NAAT may be useful in screening of donors, as it reduces the wastage and the holding time of the allografts.
Authors: Paula Hovanyecz; Alicia Lorenti; José Manuel Juan Lucero; Adrián Gorla; Alejandro Enrique Castiglioni Journal: Cell Tissue Bank Date: 2015-03-27 Impact factor: 1.522
Authors: Jonathan M Warnock; Clare H Rowan; Helen Davidson; Ciara Millar; M Gavan McAlinden Journal: Cell Tissue Bank Date: 2015-07-03 Impact factor: 1.522
Authors: David Love; Michael Pritchard; Tanya Burgess; Gavin Van Der Meer; Richard Page; Simon Williams Journal: ANZ J Surg Date: 2009 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.872