To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

OTA 2019: No difference in outcomes between AIBG and cement in tibial plateau fracture bone defects

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Ace Report Cover
November 2019

OTA 2019: No difference in outcomes between AIBG and cement in tibial plateau fracture bone defects

Vol: 8| Issue: 11| Number:3| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:N/A
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

Autologous Iliac Bone Graft versus Biphasic Hydroxyapatite/Calcium Sulfate Cement for Treatment of Bone Defects in Tibial Plateau Fractures: A Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial

Contributing Authors:
Alex Hofmann Stanislav Gorbulev Paul Alfred Grützner Arndt P Schulz Rupert Schupfner M Raschke M van Griensven PM Rommens

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

CONFERENCE ACE REPORTS

This ACE Report is a summary of a conference presentation or abstract. The information provided has limited the ability to provide an accurate assessment of the risk of bias or the overall quality. Please interpret the results with caution as trials may be in progress and select results may have been presented.

Synopsis

Bone graft substitutes are generally required in tibial plateau fractures. Previous studies have established calcium phosphate as superior to autogenous iliac crest bone graft (AIBG), at least in terms of subsidence. The authors in this study randomized 137 patients with AO 41-B2 and 41-B3 fractures to receiver either AIBG or a hydroxyapatite/calcium sulfate cement. Outcomes measured were the SF-1...

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.