Fixation Using Bone Substitutes



Fixation Using Bone Substitutes


Amy L. Ladd

Arthur T. Lee



Introduction

An extensive variety of graft substitutes serve as gap fillers that can aid in restoration of structural integrity for voids and fracture fixation; the common fracture of the distal radius has been a natural target for product design and development (1,2,3). Only relatively recently were distal radius fractures treated with grafting: Improved external and internal fixation techniques in conjunction with autogenous bone grafting were reported in the 1980s and 1990s, and thus such is recognized as an important adjunct (4,5,6). The benefits of autogenous graft included faster healing, earlier removal of external fixation, and improved anatomic and functional outcome. The benefits, however, accompany morbidity and hospitalization costs specifically with iliac crest graft harvest (Table 10-1) (7). This disparity influenced surgeons and entrepreneurs alike to seek better alternatives for fracture augmentation, and numerous substitutes have been in use throughout the musculoskeletal system, in addition to the distal radius. The indications and potential indications for current use of substitutes in metaphyseal voids and fractures about the wrist are the primary focus of this chapter. The use of organic and polymeric grafts still in development or not widely used are beyond the scope herein, but many examples may be found in Tables 10-2, 10-3, 10-4, 10-5 and 10-6.


Mineral Substitutes Commonly Used in the Distal Radius


Ceramics and Cement

The mineral substitutes may arbitrarily be divided into ceramics and cements (Tables 10-3 and 10-4). Ceramic is a mineral salt heated to high temperatures, greater than 1,000ºC, in the process known as sintering. Sintering provides strength to a finished material, but when applied to bone or similar minerals, decreases the remodeling and resorption capability of bone.

Many surgeons express concern about the slow disappearance, whether by resorption or remodeling, of the mineral substances on radiographs. This concern is supported by several arguments: The material is a foreign object, it obscures bone healing, and it potentially alters the mechanics of joints and soft tissue, because this is a harder substance than the surrounding bone. Although this concern may be unsubstantiated, radiographic appearance of bone trabeculation replacing the substitute is an increasingly desirable attribute of new materials. More extensive interconnected porosity of a substance permits faster bony ingrowth but weakens the material; the ideal pore size is thought to be between 150 and 500 μ. Both sintered and nonsintered porous substances exist, the latter of which permit faster resorption. Whether resorption correlates with remodeling depends on the material and the local environment.


Coral

Coralline HA is coral that is thermochemically treated with ammonium phosphate, which demonstrates porosity similar to bone (Fig. 10-1). The thermochemical conversion process for Pro Osteon (Interpore Cross International, Irvine, California, now a Biomet company) converts 95% of the coral’s calcium carbonate into more slowly resorbed HA. This is not a sintering process, and it is therefore not technically a ceramic, but the conversion has a similar effect of minimizing its resorption. Bone ingrowth has been demonstrated in the interconnected pores, with osteoblasts evident on the surface of the material (14). Remodeling has not been identified. Formulations include different pore sizes, with the larger (approximately 500 μ) pore size more appropriate for cancellous

bone defects. Its compressive strength is reported as approximately 4 MPa. The 200-μ size is used more commonly in dentistry. Recent formulation with calcium carbonate on its surface (Pro Osteon R) permits some resorption, and potentially better ingrowth. Pro Osteon was the first calcium phosphate-based bone graft substitute to receive FDA approval for fracture treatment in 1992, and received general use approval in 1998. The 500-μ pore size formulation has found widespread orthopedic applications, and is shown to be useful in fractures of the distal radius for both internal and external fixation (15).








Table 10-1. Advantages and Disadvantages of Autologous Bone Graft








Advantages Disadvantages
Osteoinductive and osteoconductive
Osteogenic
Available in cortical and cancellous forms
Provides structural support
Biocompatible
Incorporates into host site
Remodels to become normal bone
Problems associated with harvest:
  Increased operative time, hospital stay, cost
  Increased blood loss, postoperative pain, risk of infection and fracture
Avascular bone: potential nidus for infection
Limited supply
Variable quality








Table 10-2. Human Allograft Bone
































































Product Company Type Indications Advantages Disadvantages
Human Allograft Banked Bone Osteoinductive/Osteoconductive
Allograft Bone Osteotech, University of Florida Tissue Bank, Sofamor Danek, Allosource, Regeneration Technologies Inc. (RTI) Biologics, and others

  • Bone/joints with soft tissue attachments
  • Machined or shaped bone
  • Corticocancellous blocks
  • Cancellous cubes, chips, morsels
Replacement or extension of autograft

  • Provides structural support
  • Osteoconductive
  • Osteoinductive


  • Variable quality
  • Compared with autograft
  • Less potential for bone formation
  • Weaker
  • Possibility of disease transmission
  • CryoLife temporarily closed by FDA and CDC in 2002 for safety reasons (CDC ref)
  • RTI cited by FDA for blood pooling practices in 2001
Allograft Demineralized Bone Matrix (DBM) Potentially Osteoinductive
Grafton DBM Osteotech Glycerol carrier Available in gel, flexible sheet, putty and semisolid (“crunch”) forms Nonunion, delayed and potentially delayed unions

  • Potentially osteoinductive
  • Solid formulations provide some structural support
  • Large clinical experience
Human derived:


  • Variable starting material
  • Potential for disease transmission
  • Potential immunogenicity
  • Gel offers no structural support
  • Recent concerns about toxicity of glycerol (Bostrom)
Allofuse Allosource Particulate DBM, reconstitute with saline Nonunion, delayed and potentially delayed unions

  • Potentially


  • Human derived, as above
DBX Synthes USA, Musculoskeletal Tissue Foundation (MTF) and Lifecore DBM + hyaluronic acid + collagen carrier Nonunion, delayed and potentially delayed unions

  • Potentially osteoinductive


  • Human derived, as above
  • Critics claim hyaluronic acid carrier (xenograft coxcomb) is untested
Allogenix Biomet/Lorenz Surgical DMC with natural lipid carrier (lecithin) Small cranial defects/craniotomies

  • Biocompatible
  • Osteoinductive
  • Resorbs in 6 to 18 months
 
Osteofil RTI DBM (24%) with gelatin carrier 17%) and water Nonunion, delayed and potentially delayed unions

  • Potentially osteoinductive
  • Moldable but hardens at body temperature
 
      Metaphyseal fractures

  • Does not wash away with irrigation
  • Potential for remodeling exists (not yet proved)


  • Human derived, as above
CDC, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; FDA, US Food and Drug Administration.
Modified from Ladd AL, Pliam NB. Use of bone-graft substitutes in distal radius fractures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 7(5):279–290, 1999.








Table 10-3. Mineral Composites
















































Product Company Type Indications Advantages Disadvantages
Osteoinductive/Osteoconductive
Opteform Exactech + Regeneration Technologies Inc. (RTI) biologics Compacted corticocancellous human bone chips mixed with Osteofill (RTI) Reconstruction of acetabulum, tibial plateau, calcaneus, etc.

  • Potentially osteoinductive and osteoconductive
  • Moldable but hardens at body temperature
  • Does not wash away with irrigation
  • Potential for remodeling exists (not yet proved)


  • Human derived, as above
Allomatrix Wright Medical DBM + calcium sulfate as carrier:


  • Putty (Custom)
  • Block (DR)
  • Injectable
Nonunion, delayed and potentially delayed unions, metaphyseal defects
Periarticular fractures (DR)


  • Potentially osteoinductive and Osteoconductive
  • Potential stability with DR form
  • Potentially better carrier (inert, non protein) than other carriers for DBM


  • Human derived, as above
Collagraft Zimmer/Angiotech Pharmaceuticals Bovine collagen, HA and tricalcium phosphate (TCP)
Available in granular or strip forms
Grafting of long bone fractures and filling of traumatic defects

  • Osteoconductive
  • Osteoinductive when used with marrow


  • Requires aspirated marrow
  • Hard to confine to desired site
  • Bovine collagen antigenicity in some patients
  • Reluctance of bovine use in Europe (Mad Cow disease) despite US source
Healos Orquest, now DePuy HA coated bovine collagen sponge, approved in Europe Replacement of autograft or autograft extender for spinal fusion

  • Osteoinductive when used with marrow


  • No structural support
  • Potential immunogenicity
  • Requires aspirated marrow
rhCollagen FibroGen Recombinant human collagen Use in development

  • Lacks immunogenic potential of xenograft


  • No data available spring 2003
Modified from Ladd AL, Pliam NB. Use of bone-graft substitutes in distal radius fractures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 7(5):279–290, 1999.

Osteoinduction may be introduced with the osteoconduction of the coralline HA when grafting is combined with autologous platelets from a special autotransfusion process. The cytokines transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β) and platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) have been identified in this filtrate through the technique called Autologous Growth Factors (AGF, also marketed by Interpore Cross; see platelet rich plasma (PRPs) in Proteins and Growth Factors, Table 10-6).


Calcium Sulfate

Calcium sulfate, better known as plaster of paris, results from the calcination of gypsum (CaSO4, 2 H2O), which partially dehydrates to produce a hemihydrate (CaSO4, 1/2 H2O) (Fig. 10-2). Because the clinical use of calcium sulfate predated the existence of the FDA, it was designated a class II “special controls” device in 1998, requiring institution of voluntary consensus standards for its use. This consensus is known as surgical grade, reflecting purity and consistency of the material. The first calcium sulfate marketed was Osteoset (Wright Medical, Arlington, TN), available in pellet form, and more recently as an injectable (Minimally Invasive Injectable Graft, MIIG); see Table 10-4 for other formulations.















Table 10-5. Bioglasses and Polymers
















































Product Company Type Indications Advantages Disadvantages
Osteoconductive
Novabone (particulate form of Bioglass) US Biomaterials Bioactive Glass (SiO2 and minerals) Reconstructive procedures and bone defect filling

  • Resorbable and eliminated by body
  • Allows cell ingrowth and remodeling
  • Can be combined with autograft


  • Silica is nonphysiologic
  • Hard to confine to desired site
  • Little structural support
  • Resorption rate not yet established
Cortoss Orthovita Polymer system with reinforcing particle bioactive glass (available in Europe) Augmentation of screws in osteoporotic bone (hip, spine, etc.)

  • Forms biological interface


  • Not yet marketed in US (spring 2003)
  • US pilot study to assess vertebral fractures in progress 2003
Immix OsteoBiologics, Inc PGA/PLA (polyglycolic acid/polylactic acid polymer to be produced in chip, flex and honeycomb forms Bone graft extender and scaffold

  • Versatile
  • May prove a good growth factors carrier
  • inexpensive


  • Still in development
  • Nonphysiologic material
Ceredex ETEX Resorbable matrix for in vivo delivery of growth factors, antibiotics, vaccines Carrier for in vivo biologic

  • Unknown


  • Unknown
Poly(methyl methacrylate)—PMMA Various; Howmedica most common Vinyl polymer Immediate stability, bone defects, implant interface

  • Easy to mold
  • Excellent compressive strength


  • Toxicity of monomer
  • Exothermic reaction, local cellular toxicityi
Modified from Ladd AL, Pliam NB. Use of bone-graft substitutes in distal radius fractures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 7(5):279–290, 1999.








Table 10-6. Factors and Proteins








Only gold members can continue reading. Log In or Register to continue

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Jun 14, 2016 | Posted by in ORTHOPEDIC | Comments Off on Fixation Using Bone Substitutes

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access
Product Company Type Indications Advantages