ABSTRACT
Background: Artificial bone graft substitutes (ABGS) for curettage of bone tumors are becoming increasingly popular. The aim of this retrospective analysis was to determine the efficacy of the ABGS Cerasorb (Curasan-AG, Kleinostheim, Germany), a beta-tricalcium phosphate (beta-TCP), concerning resorption profile, bone healing, and remodeling after surgery and to evaluate potential complications. Methods: Forty-three patients suffering from benign and low-grade malignant bone tumors were treated with curettage and refilling of the bony cavity using the ABGS Cerasorb between 2018 and 2021 and included in the final analysis. Clinical follow-up exams with X-rays in two planes were performed 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year after surgery. Results: After a mean follow-up period of 14.6 months, radiological consolidation following curettage was observed in all patients. Total resorption was observed in 16.3% of patients; in the other 83.7%, resorption was partial. In four patients, of whom two had a tumor in the distal femur and two in the humeral diaphysis, fractures occurred within 6 weeks after primary surgery. Conclusion: In conclusion, the beta-TCP Cerasorb seems to be a reliable bone graft substitute with low complication rates and is a suitable alternative to autologous bone grafts or allografts. Nonetheless, it shows a tendency of delayed resorption. Level of Evidence: III; retrospective cohort study.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this review was to summarize the available evidence for biomechanical stability following surgical DOB reconstruction, and to determine whether distal radioulnar joint (DRUJ) stability with a reconstructed DOB was similar to the native intact condition or that after the Adams procedure. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic literature search according to the PRISMA guidelines was performed using the databases PubMed and Embase. The following search algorithm was used: ("DOB" OR "Distal Oblique Bundle") AND "Reconstruction". Biomechanical or human cadaveric studies that measured stability of the DRUJ after reconstruction of the DOB were included. RESULTS: Four articles were included in the final analysis. DOB incidence was reported to be between 50% and 70%. Two studies observed no differences between the intact situation and the reconstructed DOB, respectively the Adams procedure. A further author group found no signs of major instability after the Adams reconstruction or after DOB reconstruction, except for decreased stability during supination in the DOB sample. In another study, similar results could be shown for the Adams and DOB reconstruction groups; however, the DOB sample showed decreased dorsal translation of the radius during forearm supination. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, DOB reconstruction was proven to stabilize the DRUJ adequately. Moreover, the reconstructed DOB showed the same stability as the native DOB, except for one study, in which stability following reconstruction was reduced during supination. No significant difference between the DOB and the Adams reconstruction could be observed.
