-
Cureus Feb 2024Burn injuries, a major global health concern, result in an estimated 180,000 fatalities annually. Despite tremendous progress in treatment methods over the years, the... (Review)
Review
Burn injuries, a major global health concern, result in an estimated 180,000 fatalities annually. Despite tremendous progress in treatment methods over the years, the morbidity and mortality associated with burns remain significant. Autologous skin grafting, particularly split-thickness skin grafting (STSG), has been a cornerstone in burn reconstruction, and it has facilitated survival and functional recovery for total body surface area (TBSA) significantly. However, the requirement for primary closure at the donor site due to the constraints of full-thickness donor harvesting continues to pose challenges. The introduction of dermal regenerative templates (DRT) in the late 1970s marked a substantial step forward in tissue engineering, addressing the inadequacy of dermal replacement with STSGs. This systematic review aimed to compare the outcomes of different graft types - bioengineered, autografts, allografts, and xenografts - in burn reconstruction over the last 24 years. The review focused on the pros and cons of each graft type, offering clinical insights grounded in experience and evidence. The approach involved a systematic review of studies published in English from January 2000 to January 2024, covering randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, case-control studies, and case series. The participants comprised individuals of all ages who underwent burn reconstruction with skin grafts, specifically split-thickness grafts, full-thickness grafts, composite grafts, and epidermal grafts (autografts, allografts, and xenografts) and bioengineered grafts. The primary outcomes were functional and cosmetic results, patient satisfaction, graft survival, and complications. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials version 2 (RoB 2), the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for non-randomized studies, and the Canada Institute for Health Economics (IHE) quality appraisal tool for case series. Our initial search yielded a total of 1,995 articles, out of which 10 studies were selected for final analysis. Among the four clinical trials assessed, 75% showed a high risk of bias. The studies reviewed involved various graft types, with six studies (60%) concentrating on allografts, three (30%) on autografts, and one (10%) on bioengineered skin grafts. The outcomes were varied, underlining the intricate nature of burn wound management. Our evaluation revealed promising results for autologous-engineered skin substitutes and allografts but also highlighted methodological disparities among the studies included. The dominance of observational studies and the diversity of outcome measures present obstacles to direct comparisons. Future research should address these limitations, employing well-structured RCTs, standardized outcome measures, and exploring long-term outcomes and patient-specific factors. The rapidly evolving field of regenerative medicine offers great potential for novel grafting methods. This systematic review provides valuable insights into the diverse outcomes of burn reconstruction using different graft types. Autologous-engineered skin substitutes and allografts seem to hold significant promise, suggesting a possible shift in grafting techniques. However, methodological inconsistencies and the lack of high-quality evidence underscore the necessity for further research to fine-tune burn care approaches.
PubMed: 38496152
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.54277 -
European Journal of Medical Research Nov 2023Although autografts are not feasible in patients with extensive burn wounds, allografts and xenografts can be used for temporary coverage. In this systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Although autografts are not feasible in patients with extensive burn wounds, allografts and xenografts can be used for temporary coverage. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we compared the outcomes of xenografts and the standard treatment of burn wounds.
METHODS
International online databases were searched for English articles comparing xenografts with routine treatment in the burn patients. The random-effects model was used to estimate standardized mean differences (SMD) or odds ratios (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).
RESULTS
From a total of 7144 records, 14 studies were included in our review after screening by title and abstracts followed by full-texts. No significant difference in hospital stays was found between the mammalian xenografts and control groups (SMD [95% CI] = - 0.18 [- 0.54-0.18]). The mean number of dressing changes was significantly lower in both mammalian xenografts compared to the controls (SMD [95% CI] = - 1.01 [- 1.61-- 0.41]) and fish xenografts compared to controls (SMD [95% CI] = - 6.16 [- 7.65-- 4.66]). In the fish xenografts, re-epithelialization time was significantly lower compared to controls (SMD [95% CI] = - 1.18 [- 2.23-- 0.14]).
CONCLUSIONS
Xenografts showed a significantly lower number of dressing changes and fish xenografts showed significant benefit in re-epithelialization compared to routine treatment. The beneficial results of xenografts suggest further research in the use of different types of xenografts in patients with extensive burn.
Topics: Humans; Burns; Heterografts
PubMed: 37974238
DOI: 10.1186/s40001-023-01505-9 -
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology,... Aug 2023The reverse fragility index (RFI) is a novel metric to appraise the results of studies reporting statistically non-significant results. The purpose of this study was to... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
The reverse fragility index (RFI) is a novel metric to appraise the results of studies reporting statistically non-significant results. The purpose of this study was to determine the statistical robustness of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting non-significant differences in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) graft failure rates, defined as re-rupture/revision ACLR rate, between hamstring tendon (HT) and bone-patellar tendon-bone (BTB) autografts by calculating RFIs.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed to identify RCTs that compared HT to BTB grafts for ACLR through January 2022. Studies reporting non-significant differences in graft re-rupture and revision ACLR rate (n.s.) were included. The RFI, defined as the fewest number of event reversals needed to change the non-significant graft re-rupture/revision outcome to statistically significant (P < 0.05), was recorded for each study. In addition, the number of studies in which the loss to follow-up exceeded the RFI was recorded.
RESULTS
Among the 16 included RCTs, the median (interquartile range [IQR]) sample size was 71 (64-114), and the median (IQR) total number of graft re-rupture/revision ACLR events was 4 (4-6). The median (IQR) graft re-rupture/revision ACLR rate was 4.3% (3.0-6.4) overall, 4.1% (2.6-6.7) in the BTB group, and 5.4% (3.0-6.3) in the HT group. The median (IQR) RFI was 3 (3-4), signifying that a reversal of the outcome in 3 patients in one arm was needed to flip the studies' result from non-significant to statistically significant (P < 0.05). The median (IQR) number of participants lost to follow-up was 11 (3-13), and 13 (81.3%) of the included studies had a loss to follow-up greater than the studies' RFI.
CONCLUSION
The results of RCTs reporting statistically non-significant re-rupture/revision ACLR rates between HT and BTB autografts would become significant if the outcome were reversed in a small number of patients-a number that was less than the loss to follow-up in the majority of studies. Thus, the neutrality of these studies is fragile, and a true statistically significant difference in re-rupture/revision rates may have been undetected.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level I.
Topics: Humans; Patellar Ligament; Autografts; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction; Transplantation, Autologous; Hamstring Tendons; Bone-Patellar Tendon-Bone Grafting; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37093236
DOI: 10.1007/s00167-023-07420-0 -
Global Spine Journal Feb 2024Systematic literature review To critically analyze the literature and describe the complications associated with the use of allograft in 1- or 2- level anterior...
Systematic literature review To critically analyze the literature and describe the complications associated with the use of allograft in 1- or 2- level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases was conducted for literature published between January 2000 and August 2020 reporting complications associated with the use of allograft in 1- or 2- level ACDF. From 584 potentially relevant citations, 21 met the inclusion criteria (4 randomized controlled trials (RCT), 4 prospective, and 13 retrospective studies). The patient number varied between 26 and 463 in comparative studies (RCT and non-RCT) and between 29 and 345 in non-comparative studies. Fusion rate was reported in 14 studies and ranged between 68.5-100%. The most frequently reported complication was post-operative dysphagia or dysphonia, with incidences ranging between .5% and 14.4%. Revision surgery was the second most reported complication (14 studies) and ranged between 0% and 10.3%. Wound-related complications were reported in 6 studies and ranged between 0% and 22.8%. The overall reporting of complications was low with very few comparative studies. Reported complications with allografts are within the range of other osteobiologics and autografts and in most cases may not attributable to the use of osteobiologics and may be complications of the procedure itself. Comparative studies with a more robust methodology analyzing complications with allograft and other osteobiologics are needed to inform current practice with strong recommendations.
PubMed: 38421325
DOI: 10.1177/21925682231173358 -
PloS One 2024Treatment of nerve injuries proves to be a worldwide clinical challenge. Acellular nerve allografts are suggested to be a promising alternative for bridging a nerve gap... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Treatment of nerve injuries proves to be a worldwide clinical challenge. Acellular nerve allografts are suggested to be a promising alternative for bridging a nerve gap to the current gold standard, an autologous nerve graft.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review the efficacy of the acellular nerve allograft, its difference from the gold standard (the nerve autograft) and to discuss its possible indications.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were systematically searched until the 4th of January 2022. Original peer reviewed paper that presented 1) distinctive data; 2) a clear comparison between not immunologically processed acellular allografts and autologous nerve transfers; 3) was performed in laboratory animals of all species and sex. Meta analyses and subgroup analyses (for graft length and species) were conducted for muscle weight, sciatic function index, ankle angle, nerve conduction velocity, axon count diameter, tetanic contraction and amplitude using a Random effects model. Subgroup analyses were conducted on graft length and species.
RESULTS
Fifty articles were included in this review and all were included in the meta-analyses. An acellular allograft resulted in a significantly lower muscle weight, sciatic function index, ankle angle, nerve conduction velocity, axon count and smaller diameter, tetanic contraction compared to an autologous nerve graft. No difference was found in amplitude between acellular allografts and autologous nerve transfers. Post hoc subgroup analyses of graft length showed a significant reduced muscle weight in long grafts versus small and medium length grafts. All included studies showed a large variance in methodological design.
CONCLUSION
Our review shows that the included studies, investigating the use of acellular allografts, showed a large variance in methodological design and are as a consequence difficult to compare. Nevertheless, our results indicate that treating a nerve gap with an allograft results in an inferior nerve recovery compared to an autograft in seven out of eight outcomes assessed in experimental animals. In addition, based on our preliminary post hoc subgroup analyses we suggest that when an allograft is being used an allograft in short and medium (0-1cm, > 1-2cm) nerve gaps is preferred over an allograft in long (> 2cm) nerve gaps.
Topics: Animals; Autografts; Allografts; Nerve Regeneration; Transplantation, Homologous; Transplantation, Autologous; Sciatic Nerve
PubMed: 38295088
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0279324 -
The American Journal of Sports Medicine Mar 2024Multiple studies have compared outcomes among patients undergoing revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with autograft versus allograft, but these...
BACKGROUND
Multiple studies have compared outcomes among patients undergoing revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) with autograft versus allograft, but these data are inconsistently reported and long-term outcomes depending on graft type are yet to be determined.
PURPOSE
To perform a systematic review of clinical outcomes after revision ACLR (rACLR) with autograft versus allograft.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify studies that compared the outcomes of patients undergoing rACLR with autograft versus allograft. The search phrase used was . Graft rerupture rates, return-to-sports rates, anteroposterior laxity, and patient-reported outcome scores (subjective International Knee Documentation Committee, Tegner, Lysholm, and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score) were evaluated.
RESULTS
Eleven studies met inclusion criteria, including 3011 patients undergoing rACLR with autograft (mean age, 28.9 years) and 1238 patients undergoing rACLR with allograft (mean age, 28.0 years). Mean follow-up was 57.3 months. The most common autograft and allograft types were bone-patellar tendon-bone grafts. Overall, 6.2% of patients undergoing rACLR experienced graft retear, including 4.7% in the autograft group and 10.2% in the allograft group ( < .0001). Among studies that reported return-to-sports rates, 66.2% of patients with an autograft returned to sports as opposed to 45.3% of patients with an allograft ( = .01). Two studies found significantly greater postoperative knee laxity in the allograft group as compared with the autograft group ( < .05). Among all patient-reported outcomes, 1 study found 1 significant difference between groups: patients with an autograft had a significantly higher postoperative Lysholm score when compared with patients with an allograft.
CONCLUSION
Patients undergoing revision ACLR with an autograft can be expected to experience lower rates of graft retear, higher rates of return to sports, and less postoperative anteroposterior knee laxity when compared with patients undergoing revision ACLR with an allograft.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Autografts; Transplantation, Autologous; Transplantation, Homologous; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction; Allografts
PubMed: 36867049
DOI: 10.1177/03635465231152232 -
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery... May 2024The hamstring tendon (HT) autograft is currently the most widely utilised autograft option for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. However, recent studies...
Comparative effectiveness of peroneus longus tendon (PLT) autografts versus hamstring tendon (HT) autografts in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a comprehensive systematic review and meta analysis.
The hamstring tendon (HT) autograft is currently the most widely utilised autograft option for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. However, recent studies endorse the peroneus longus tendon (PLT) autograft as a viable alternative. To evaluate this, we systematically reviewed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to compare the efficacy of PLT against HT autografts. Our search encompassed Cochrane, Embase, OVID, PubMed, and Scopus databases for RCTs comparing outcomes of PLT and HT autografts in ACL reconstruction. Primary outcomes included Lysholm and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores, while secondary outcomes involved American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) scores, graft diameters and donor-site complications. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4 (Cochrane Collaboration) and heterogeneity was assessed with I statistics. 683 patients from 6 RCTs were included, with 338 (49.5%) patients treated with PLT autografts. Follow-up ranged from 12 to 30 months. Despite lower preoperative Lysholm scores in the PLT group, no significant differences were observed at 6 and 12 months. Although preoperative and 6-month IKDC scores were lower in the PLT group, no significant differences were found at 12 and 24 months. AOFAS scores showed no significant preoperative difference, but slightly lower scores were noted in the PLT group at 12 or 24 months. There was no significant difference in graft diameter, while donor-site complications were fewer in the PLT group. In summary, the PLT autograft is a promising and non-inferior alternative to the HT autograft, demonstrating equivalent outcomes in patient-reported knee and ankle metrics, comparable graft diameters and fewer donor-site complications.
PubMed: 38755499
DOI: 10.1007/s00590-024-03984-w -
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Mar 2024Autologous fat grafting (AFG) is a breast augmentation method for treating volume and contour abnormalities. This systematic review aims to summarize complications,...
BACKGROUND
Autologous fat grafting (AFG) is a breast augmentation method for treating volume and contour abnormalities. This systematic review aims to summarize complications, radiologic safety, volume retention, and patient satisfaction associated with AFG.
METHODS
The PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Wiley library, clinical key/Elsevier, and EBSCO databases were searched for relevant studies from January of 2009 to March of 2022. Articles describing AFG for breast augmentation were selected based on predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were adhered to, and the study was registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. The Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions assessment was used to assess the quality of studies and the risk of bias was measured using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions.
RESULTS
A total of 35 studies comprising 3757 women were included. The average follow-up duration was 24.5 months (range, 1 to 372 months). The overall complication rate was 27.8%, with fat necrosis making up 43.7% of all complications. Average fat volume injected was 300 mL (range, 134 to 610 mL), and average volume retention was 58% (range, 44% to 83%). Volume retention was greater with supplementation of fat with platelet-rich plasma and stromal vascular fraction. The most common radiologic changes were fat necrosis (9.4%) and calcification (1.2%). After 1 year of follow-up, patient satisfaction was, on average, 92% (range, 83.2% to 97.5%). The included studies were of good quality and consisted of a moderate risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS
AFG was associated with an overall complication rate of 27.8%. Additional supplementation of fat with platelet-rich plasma and stromal vascular fraction may improve graft survival. Despite poor volume retention being a persistent drawback, patient satisfaction remains high.
Topics: Female; Humans; Adipose Tissue; Fat Necrosis; Mammaplasty; Transplantation, Autologous; Autografts
PubMed: 37166041
DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010614 -
Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and... Apr 2024To review the literature reporting on complications and failure rates after primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in patients ≥40 years. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To review the literature reporting on complications and failure rates after primary anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) in patients ≥40 years.
METHODS
This was a secondary analysis from a prior systematic review of the MEDLINE, CINAHL, SportDiscus, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases on studies evaluating clinical outcomes in ACLR patients ≥40 years. Studies were included based on the following criteria: English-language studies reporting on postoperative complications and/or ACLR failure rates in patients ≥40 years. Case reports, technical notes, studies with duplicate reporting of patient cohorts, or studies using publicly available registry data were excluded. ACLR failure definitions, failure rates, graft rupture rates, revision ACLR and non-ACLR revision rates, and complication rates were recorded.
RESULTS
Twenty-one studies were included following full-text review. Autografts were used in 89.0% of cases. Definitions for ACLR failure varied, ranging from (1) revision ACLR, (2) graft rupture, (3) clinical examination of increased knee laxity, and (4) postoperative arthrofibrosis requiring an additional surgery. The median ACLR failure rate was 5.0% (range, 0%-12.1%) among the 9 studies reporting this outcome, with only 4 of the studies providing explicit definitions of failure. The median ACLR revision surgery, graft rupture, and non-ACLR revision surgery rates were 0% (range, 0%-7.7%), 2.7% (range, 0%-9.1%), and 7.2% (range 0%-34.4%), respectively. Commonly reported complications included pain (range, 0%-14.0%), stiffness (range, 0%-12.7%), hematoma (range, 2.5%-8.8%), neurovascular (range, 0%-41.7%), and undefined (range, 0%-13.8%).
CONCLUSIONS
ACLR in patients over 40 years old shows low failure rates.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level IV, systematic review of Level II-IV studies.
PubMed: 38706974
DOI: 10.1016/j.asmr.2024.100899 -
Minerva Dental and Oral Science Dec 2023Regenerative medicine emerged as a promising strategy for addressing bone defects, with several bone grafts currently being used, including autografts, allografts,...
INTRODUCTION
Regenerative medicine emerged as a promising strategy for addressing bone defects, with several bone grafts currently being used, including autografts, allografts, xenografts and alloplasts. Calcium-based biomaterials (CaXs), a well-known class of synthetic materials, have demonstrated good biological properties and are being investigated for their potential to facilitate bone regeneration. This systematic review evaluates the current clinical applications of CaXs in dentistry for bone regeneration.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
A comprehensive search was conducted to collect information about CaXs and their applications in the dental field over the last ten years. The search was limited to relevant articles published in peer-reviewed journals.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
A total of 72 articles were included in this scoping review, with eight studies related to periodontology, 63 in implantology and three in maxillofacial surgery respectively. The findings suggest that CaXs hold promise as an alternative intervention for minor bone regeneration in dentistry.
CONCLUSIONS
Calcium-based biomaterials have shown potential as a viable option for bone regeneration in dentistry. Further research is warranted to fully understand their efficacy and safety in larger bone defects. CaXs represent an exciting avenue for researchers and clinicians to explore in their ongoing efforts to advance regenerative medicine.
PubMed: 38127421
DOI: 10.23736/S2724-6329.23.04859-3