header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

General Orthopaedics

EFFICACY OF BIO-ACTIVE GLASS BAG-S53P4 FOR THE RECONSTRUCTION OF SEGMENTAL BONE DEFECTS OF SEPTIC ORIGIN: A COMPARATIVE STUDY

European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS), Nantes, France, September 2017



Abstract

Aim

Infections in long bones can be divided in osteitis, osteomyelitis and septic non-unions. All are challenging situations for the orthopaedic surgeon. Treatment is a mix with debridement, radical resection of infected tissue, void filling with different types of products, and antibiotic therapy of different kinds. In cavitary bone defects, bioglasses such as BAG-S53P4 have given good results in early or mid-term follow-up. Results of such treatment in segmental bone defects remain unknown. The goal of our study was to evaluate efficacity of active bioglass BAG-S53P4 in septic segmental bone defects.

Method

A retrospective cohort study has been done in a single specific orthopaedic center devoted to treatment of infected bony situations. All cases were a severe septic bone defect. We have compared the segmental bone defects to the cavitary ones. Results were analyzed on recurrence of infection, bone healing, functional result and complication rate.

Results

14 patients were included with a minimum follow-up of 1 year after treatment. 8 were in the group “cavitary”, 6 in the group “segmental”. The mean age was 54 years-old (30–76). Sex-ratio was 2.5. All patients have been treated with bone resection and debridement of infected bone and tissue, even if more than 1 surgery was necessary in some cases. After cleaning, 7 patients have needed a local flap, and 1 a free flap. Then, all bone defects were filled up by bioglass BAG-S53P4*. Additional antibiotherapy with specific molecules based of the results of bacterial analysis, was given for a minimum time-period of 6 weeks. In the “cavitary” group, the mean volume of BAG-S53P4 was de 21.25 ml (10–60). In the “segmental” group, it was of 12.5 ml (10–20). The healing rate was of 80% in the “cavitary” group and of 100% in the “segmental” one. No complication related to the bioglass insertion was noted.

Conclusions

Different publications have been made using bioglass in the treatment of infected bone with a continuous bone such as osteitis or osteomyelitis. Our study is the first one to compare specifically the results obtained in a cavitary defect where the bone is still in continuity, and in a segmental defect. Active bioglass such as the BAG-S53P4 seems to be a good option in the treatment of segmental septic bone defects in the limb.

*BonAlive Biomaterials Ltd, Turku, Finland


E-mail: