| Literature DB >> 36147123 |
Amine El Farhaoui1,2, Kamal Benalia1,2, Adnane Lachkar1,2, Najib Abdeljaouad1,2, Hicham Yacoubi1,2.
Abstract
Introduction: The reconstruction of bone defects of tumoral, infectious or traumatic origin of the limbs remains a major therapeutic challenge for the orthopedic surgeon and the patient, in terms of anatomical and functional results. Cases presentation: We report the case of 7 patients who underwent induced membrane bone reconstruction of the upper extremity, 5 patients with initial injury to the forearm, and 2 of our patients, to the humerus. In terms of function, the range of prono-supination was 125°, the range of wrist flexion-extension was 165°, and the range of elbow mobility was 170°. All patients achieved union at the time of the last follow-up. Two patients achieved union at 6 months, one patient at 5 months, one patient at 4 months, and three patients at 3 months. Discussion: The induced membrane (IM) technique has been used for more than 30 years, and it's more and more widely accepted all over the world, as a simple and effective technique for reconstruction of segmental bone defects. The technique comprises 2 surgical stages, The first step involves the total excision of infected and non-viable lesions both bone and soft tissue until tissue with optimal vascularization "Paprika sign", then the strict instrumental stabilization of the skeleton and the realization of a covering flap if necessary, depending on the site of the initial injury initial lesion and the extent of the resection.Entities:
Keywords: Biological cement; Bone loss; Graft; Induced membrane technique; Upper limb
Year: 2022 PMID: 36147123 PMCID: PMC9486742 DOI: 10.1016/j.amsu.2022.104533
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Med Surg (Lond) ISSN: 2049-0801
Fig. 1A. X-ray on admission: fractures of the middle 1/3-lower 1/3 junction of the ulna and radius with PSO/B. Control X-ray after Metaizeau pinning/C. Rx after cancellous grafting of the ulna and placement of the cement for the radius/D. Postoperative T2 Masquelet Rx/E. Rx at 5 months/F. Rx at 7 months/G. Rx after shortening osteotomy.
Fig. 2Intraoperative image "patient 3": A. placement of biologic cement (T1)/B. placement of graft and plate stabilization.
Fig. 3Intraoperative and radiological images of a patient with sepsis on material "patient 7″ A. Bone defect after debridement of non-viable bone tissue/B. Post-op Rx after trimming/C. Post-op Rx of T1/D. Peroperative image of T2/E. Rx after 3 months of T2.
Results of the Masquelet Technique in our case series.
| patient | Affected Bone | Defect Type | Size of Defect (cm) | Time Between Masquelet Stages 1 and 2 (weeks) | Type of Graft Used in Stage 2 | Time to Radiographic Union (months) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Midshaft Radius + ulna | Acute open fracture | 9 cm (ulna) | 6 | Fibular graft | 6 |
| 2 | Midshaft Radius | uninfected non-union | 2 cm | 6 | cancellous graft | 4 |
| 3 | Distal | Infected non-union | 1.5 cm | 8 | cortico-cancellous graft | 3 |
| 4 | Midshaft Humerus | Infected non-union | 3 cm | 10 | cortico-cancellous graft | 6 |
| 5 | distal humerus | Infected non-union | 5 cm | 22 | cortico-cancellous graft | 5 |
| 6 | Distal radius | Osteitis | 2 cm | 6 | cortico-cancellous graft | 3 |
| 7 | Midshaft radius | Osteitis | 3 cm | 6 | cortico-cancellous graft | 3 |