Ali Saad Alshahrani, Yazan Jumah Alalwani, Nihal Mushabb Alqahtani, Abdullah Shafi D Alanazi, Ahmed Khaled Almarri, Shatha Saud Alqurashi, Deemah Khalid Ghazi, Abdullah Musaaed Alsalamah, Rahaf Hamdan Alruwaili, Ahmed Y Azzam, Fawaz Alanii
{"title":"自体骨移植与骨替代物治疗胫骨平台骨折的结果:一项荟萃分析。","authors":"Ali Saad Alshahrani, Yazan Jumah Alalwani, Nihal Mushabb Alqahtani, Abdullah Shafi D Alanazi, Ahmed Khaled Almarri, Shatha Saud Alqurashi, Deemah Khalid Ghazi, Abdullah Musaaed Alsalamah, Rahaf Hamdan Alruwaili, Ahmed Y Azzam, Fawaz Alanii","doi":"10.5312/wjo.v16.i9.111068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Tibial plateau fractures often require structural support for metaphyseal defects created during articular reduction. While autologous bone grafting has been utilized as the gold standard, bone substitutes offer advantages including reduced donor site morbidity. Our meta-analysis evaluated the comparative efficacy of these approaches across clinical and operative outcomes.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing autologous bone grafts with bone substitutes for tibial plateau fractures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing autologous bone grafts with bone substitutes for tibial plateau fractures. Primary outcomes included joint depression, secondary collapse rate, operative time, blood loss, and infection rate. Subgroup analyses were performed by fracture complexity, geographic region, and methodological factors. In addition to that, we also developed a combined outcome score integrating structural, procedural, and complication domains.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven randomized controlled trials with 424 patients (296 bone substitute, 128 autograft) were included. No significant differences in joint depression or secondary collapse were observed across fracture complexity categories. Geographic variations were evident, with Western studies showing significantly higher risk of secondary collapse with autografts (risk ratio = 1.45, <i>P</i> value = 0.02). Both Western and Asian studies have demonstrated significantly reduced blood loss with bone substitutes (70-90 mL less), while operative time reduction was more significant in the Asian studies (23.65 <i>vs</i> 8.00 minutes, <i>P</i> value = 0.04 for subgroup difference). The combined outcome score (standardized effect size -0.2481) favored bone substitutes, primarily due to procedural advantages.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Bone substitutes provide similar structural outcomes to autologous bone grafts while having better procedural advantages in tibial plateau fracture management. These findings support bone substitutes as a viable option across fracture patterns. Future studies should focus on specific bone substitute formulations and cost-effectiveness analyses.</p>","PeriodicalId":47843,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Orthopedics","volume":"16 9","pages":"111068"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12444308/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Outcomes of autologous bone grafts <i>vs</i> bone substitutes in tibial plateau fractures: A meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Ali Saad Alshahrani, Yazan Jumah Alalwani, Nihal Mushabb Alqahtani, Abdullah Shafi D Alanazi, Ahmed Khaled Almarri, Shatha Saud Alqurashi, Deemah Khalid Ghazi, Abdullah Musaaed Alsalamah, Rahaf Hamdan Alruwaili, Ahmed Y Azzam, Fawaz Alanii\",\"doi\":\"10.5312/wjo.v16.i9.111068\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Tibial plateau fractures often require structural support for metaphyseal defects created during articular reduction. While autologous bone grafting has been utilized as the gold standard, bone substitutes offer advantages including reduced donor site morbidity. Our meta-analysis evaluated the comparative efficacy of these approaches across clinical and operative outcomes.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing autologous bone grafts with bone substitutes for tibial plateau fractures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing autologous bone grafts with bone substitutes for tibial plateau fractures. Primary outcomes included joint depression, secondary collapse rate, operative time, blood loss, and infection rate. Subgroup analyses were performed by fracture complexity, geographic region, and methodological factors. In addition to that, we also developed a combined outcome score integrating structural, procedural, and complication domains.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven randomized controlled trials with 424 patients (296 bone substitute, 128 autograft) were included. No significant differences in joint depression or secondary collapse were observed across fracture complexity categories. Geographic variations were evident, with Western studies showing significantly higher risk of secondary collapse with autografts (risk ratio = 1.45, <i>P</i> value = 0.02). Both Western and Asian studies have demonstrated significantly reduced blood loss with bone substitutes (70-90 mL less), while operative time reduction was more significant in the Asian studies (23.65 <i>vs</i> 8.00 minutes, <i>P</i> value = 0.04 for subgroup difference). The combined outcome score (standardized effect size -0.2481) favored bone substitutes, primarily due to procedural advantages.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Bone substitutes provide similar structural outcomes to autologous bone grafts while having better procedural advantages in tibial plateau fracture management. These findings support bone substitutes as a viable option across fracture patterns. Future studies should focus on specific bone substitute formulations and cost-effectiveness analyses.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47843,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Journal of Orthopedics\",\"volume\":\"16 9\",\"pages\":\"111068\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12444308/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Journal of Orthopedics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v16.i9.111068\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Orthopedics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v16.i9.111068","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:胫骨平台骨折通常需要在关节复位过程中对干骺端缺损进行结构支持。虽然自体骨移植已被用作金标准,但骨替代品具有降低供体部位发病率等优点。我们的荟萃分析评估了这些方法在临床和手术结果方面的比较疗效。目的:对比较自体骨移植与骨替代物治疗胫骨平台骨折的随机对照试验进行系统回顾和荟萃分析。方法:我们对比较自体骨移植和骨替代物治疗胫骨平台骨折的随机对照试验进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析。主要结局包括关节凹陷、继发衰竭率、手术时间、出血量和感染率。根据裂缝复杂性、地理区域和方法因素进行亚组分析。除此之外,我们还开发了整合结构、程序和并发症领域的综合结果评分。结果:纳入7项随机对照试验,424例患者(骨替代物296例,自体移植物128例)。不同骨折复杂程度的患者在关节凹陷或继发性塌陷方面无显著差异。地理差异明显,西方研究显示自体移植物继发塌陷的风险明显更高(风险比= 1.45,P值= 0.02)。西方和亚洲的研究均表明,骨代用品可显著减少失血量(减少70- 90ml),而亚洲研究的手术时间减少更为显著(23.65 vs 8.00分钟,亚组差异P值= 0.04)。综合结果评分(标准化效应大小-0.2481)有利于骨替代品,主要是由于程序上的优势。结论:骨替代物在胫骨平台骨折治疗中具有与自体骨移植相似的结构效果,同时具有更好的手术优势。这些发现支持骨替代物作为跨骨折类型的可行选择。未来的研究应侧重于特定的骨替代品配方和成本效益分析。
Outcomes of autologous bone grafts vs bone substitutes in tibial plateau fractures: A meta-analysis.
Background: Tibial plateau fractures often require structural support for metaphyseal defects created during articular reduction. While autologous bone grafting has been utilized as the gold standard, bone substitutes offer advantages including reduced donor site morbidity. Our meta-analysis evaluated the comparative efficacy of these approaches across clinical and operative outcomes.
Aim: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing autologous bone grafts with bone substitutes for tibial plateau fractures.
Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing autologous bone grafts with bone substitutes for tibial plateau fractures. Primary outcomes included joint depression, secondary collapse rate, operative time, blood loss, and infection rate. Subgroup analyses were performed by fracture complexity, geographic region, and methodological factors. In addition to that, we also developed a combined outcome score integrating structural, procedural, and complication domains.
Results: Seven randomized controlled trials with 424 patients (296 bone substitute, 128 autograft) were included. No significant differences in joint depression or secondary collapse were observed across fracture complexity categories. Geographic variations were evident, with Western studies showing significantly higher risk of secondary collapse with autografts (risk ratio = 1.45, P value = 0.02). Both Western and Asian studies have demonstrated significantly reduced blood loss with bone substitutes (70-90 mL less), while operative time reduction was more significant in the Asian studies (23.65 vs 8.00 minutes, P value = 0.04 for subgroup difference). The combined outcome score (standardized effect size -0.2481) favored bone substitutes, primarily due to procedural advantages.
Conclusion: Bone substitutes provide similar structural outcomes to autologous bone grafts while having better procedural advantages in tibial plateau fracture management. These findings support bone substitutes as a viable option across fracture patterns. Future studies should focus on specific bone substitute formulations and cost-effectiveness analyses.