↓ Skip to main content

Is There Benefit to Free Over Pedicled Vascularized Grafts in Augmenting Tibial Intercalary Allograft Constructs?

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
Title
Is There Benefit to Free Over Pedicled Vascularized Grafts in Augmenting Tibial Intercalary Allograft Constructs?
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, December 2016
DOI 10.1007/s11999-016-5196-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marco Manfrini, Srimanth Bindiganavile, Ferhat Say, Marco Colangeli, Laura Campanacci, Massimiliano Depaolis, Massimo Ceruso, Davide Donati

Abstract

Intercalary reconstruction of tibial sarcomas with vascularized fibula autografts and massive bone allografts is reliable with predictable long-term results. However, inadequate data exist comparing free and pedicled vascularized fibula autografts in combination with a massive bone allograft in patients undergoing intercalary tibia reconstructions. Among patients undergoing large-segment intercalary allografting, we sought to compare supplemental free vascularized fibular autografts with supplemental pedicled vascularized fibular autografts, in terms of (1) oncologic results, (2) complications associated with surgery, (3) Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) scores, and (4) surgical time. Between 1994 and 2013, we treated 320 patients, younger than 40 years, with tibial sarcomas. Thirty-five patients (11%) underwent amputations. One hundred ninety-five patients (61%) were treated with intraarticular resection of the tibia, which constituted 104 tumor endoprostheses, 63 proximal tibia allograft prosthetic composites, 21 osteoarticular allografts, and seven arthrodeses with allografts. Ninety patients (28%) underwent joint-sparing intercalary reconstruction. Forty-one (13%) of these 90 patients were treated with allografts alone, two (1%) with vascularized fibula grafts, and 47 (15%) with intercalary allografts supplemented by autografts (free fibular autografts, 22 patients, 7%; pedicled fibular autografts, 25 patients, 8%). During the study period, we used free vascularized fibular autografts in association with massive bone allograft for a resection longer than 12 cm with a very small periarticular residual segment. The choice for using a pedicled fibula harvested in the ipsilateral leg initially was for patients having only diaphyseal resections and the indication was later extended to intraepiphyseal osteotomies with a small periarticular residual segment. The goals of this study are to present the long-term results in this group of patients and compare their results based on the type of vascularized fibula harvest. There were 33 male and 14 female patients with mean age of 14 ± 6 years. The median followup was 84 months (range, 7-231 months). No patients were lost to followup before 1 year. Four patients died and were not available for followup after 18 months. The mean tibia resection length was 15 ± 4 cm and mean length of the harvested vascularized fibula was 18 ± 4 cm. Overall 5- and 10-year oncologic survival rates in this study were 87% ± 5% and 83% ± 6% respectively. With the numbers available, we observed no difference in survivorship free from death from disease between the study groups (85% ± 8% [95% CI, 174-232 months] of the free vascularized group versus 82% ± 8% [95% CI, 148-206 months] of the pedicled fibula graft group; p = 0.741). At last followup, 40 patients had no evidence of disease and seven had died of disease. Local recurrence was observed in two patients in the supplemental free vascularized fibula group and three patients in the supplemental pedicled vascularized fibula group, whereas metastases was observed in eight patients. With the numbers available, we observed no difference in the proportion of patients experiencing surgical complications between those treated with free vascularized fibula grafts and those treated with pedicled grafts (eight of 22 [36%] versus nine of 25 [36%] respectively; p = 0.605). With the numbers available, we observed no difference in mean MSTS scores between patients treated with free vascularized fibula grafts and those treated with pedicled grafts (24 ± 9 versus 25 ± 8; mean difference, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.54-4.6; p = 0.858). Mean surgical time was longer in the free vascularized fibula and massive bone allograft group at 9.4 ± 1.7 hours compared with that of the pedicled vascularized fibula and massive bone allograft group at 5.7 ± 1.3 hours (mean difference, 3.73 hours; 95% CI, 2.8-4.6 hours; p ≤ 0.001). Intercalary reconstruction of tibia sarcomas with massive bone allografts supplemented with vascularized fibula grafts provide predictable results. Complications occur as expected in a biologic reconstruction, but are salvageable, preserving the original construct. The pedicled fibula can be an alternative to a free contralateral fibula for intraepiphyseal resections. Comparative technical ease, shorter surgical time, avoidance of additional microvascular anastomosis, and avoidance of surgery on the contralateral leg are notable advantages of pedicled vascularized fibula over free fibula grafts to supplement allografts when indicated in intercalary tibia resections. Level III, therapeutic study.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 52 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 9 17%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 13%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Postgraduate 5 9%
Other 4 8%
Unknown 15 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 45%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 4%
Psychology 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 21 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 May 2018.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#5,586
of 7,298 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#267,947
of 422,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
#60
of 92 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,298 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 422,467 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 92 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.