%0 Journal Article
%T A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Outcomes of Reconstruction with Vascularised vs Non-Vascularised Bone Graft after Surgical Resection of Primary Malignant and Non-Malignant Bone Tumors.
%A Patel R
%A McConaghie G
%A Khan MM
%A Gibson W
%A Singh R
%A Banerjee R
%J Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech
%V 91
%N 3
%D 2024
%M 38963892
%F 0.222
%R 10.55095/achot2024/020
%X <B>OBJECTIVE: </B>Vascularised bone grafting (VBG) and non-vascularised bone grafting (NVBG) are crucial biological reconstructive procedures extensively employed in the management of bone tumours. The principal aim of this study is to conduct a comparative analysis of the post-resection outcomes associated with the utilisation of vascularised and non-vascularised bone grafts.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>A comprehensive and systematic literature review spanning the years 2013 to 2023 was meticulously executed, utilising prominent online databases including PubMed/Medline, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library. Inclusion criteria were restricted to comparative articles that specifically addressed outcomes pertaining to defect restoration following bone tumour resection via vascularised and non-vascularised bone grafting techniques. The quality of research methodologies was assessed using the Oxford Quality Scoring System for randomised trials and the Newcastle Ottawa Scale for non-randomised comparative studies. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS version 24. Key outcome measures encompassed the Musculoskeletal Tumour Society Score (MSTS), bone union duration, and the incidence of post-operative complications.<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>This analysis incorporated four clinical publications, enrolling a total of 178 participants (comprising 92 males and 86 females), with 90 patients subjected to VBG and 88 to NVBG procedures. The primary endpoints of interest encompassed MSTS scores and bone union durations. Although no statistically significant distinction was observed in the complication rates between the two cohorts, it is noteworthy that VBG exhibited a markedly superior bone union rate (P<0.001).<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>Our systematic evaluation revealed that VBG facilitates expedited bone union, thereby contributing to accelerated patient recovery. Notably, complication rates and functional outcomes were comparable between the VBG and NVBG groups. Moreover, the correlation between bone union duration and functional scores following VBG and NVBG merits further investigation.<BR><B>BACKGROUND: </B>reconstruction techniques, vascularised bone grafting, non-vascularised bone grafting, bone tumor, resection.