Periosteal incarceration versus interposition adipose tissue grafting in physeal fractures: pilot study in immature rabbits.
Adipose tissue graft
Periosteum incarceration
Physeal bar formation
Physeal fracture
Rabbit fracture model
Journal
Journal of experimental orthopaedics
ISSN: 2197-1153
Titre abrégé: J Exp Orthop
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101653750
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Dec 2019
01 Dec 2019
Historique:
received:
05
08
2019
accepted:
21
11
2019
entrez:
3
12
2019
pubmed:
4
12
2019
medline:
4
12
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The purpose of this study is to evaluate bar formation following physeal fracture with incarcerated periosteum or adipose tissue graft using radiographic and histological methods in an immature rabbit model. Ten-week-old rabbits underwent induced proximal tibia physeal fractures with a contralateral sham. Fractures had periosteum (n = 5) or adipose tissue (n = 5) interposed. Radiographs were compared over time by tibial medial-lateral side difference (TMLSD)(mm), femoral-tibial angle and tibia plateau angle, and physeal bars evidence. MicroCT was performed, growth plates reconstructed, and physeal area calculated and normalized to same animal contralateral physes. Physeal disruption and chondrocyte organization were evaluated histologically. Radiographic: After 6 weeks, physeal bars formed in both periosteum (4 of 4) and fat groups (3 of 5). The periosteum group showed a significant increase in the TMLSD between immediate post-op and 10 days later (p = 0.028); but, after 6 weeks, TMLSD change was not significantly different between the three groups (p = 0.161). MicroCT: The normalized physeal area of every physis in the fat group was more than 0.9 (0.99 ± 0.06). Only half of the periosteum group was over 0.9 (0.81 ± 0.24). Physeal disruption was seen by microscopic evaluation in none of the sham group, all 4 in the periosteum group and 4 of 5 in the fat group. Fat interposition may prevent, or at least delay, the onset of bars across a fractured physis compared to periosteum, but it is not completely protective.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31788750
doi: 10.1186/s40634-019-0214-4
pii: 10.1186/s40634-019-0214-4
pmc: PMC6885469
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
46Subventions
Organisme : Pediatric Orthopaedic Society of North America
ID : St. Giles Young Investigator Award
Organisme : Rady Children's Hospital - San Diego
ID : Physician Development Fund Award
Références
J Pediatr Orthop. 2002 Nov-Dec;22(6):703-9
pubmed: 12409892
J Pediatr Orthop. 2002 Nov-Dec;22(6):710-6
pubmed: 12409893
Stem Cells Transl Med. 2012 May;1(5):384-95
pubmed: 23197817
Biores Open Access. 2015 Jan 01;4(1):65-74
pubmed: 26309783
J Pediatr Orthop. 1981;1(1):3-11
pubmed: 7341649
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1981 Feb;63-B(1):83-8
pubmed: 7204480
Skeletal Radiol. 2015 Oct;44(10):1547-51
pubmed: 26138340
Radiology. 2000 May;215(2):504-11
pubmed: 10796932
Tissue Eng Part B Rev. 2018 Apr;24(2):85-97
pubmed: 28830302
J Tissue Eng Regen Med. 2015 Dec;9(12):E202-9
pubmed: 23239617
J Pediatr Orthop. 2009 Jun;29(4):356-61
pubmed: 19461377
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1975 Aug;57(3):325-30
pubmed: 1158943
J Pediatr Orthop. 2000 May-Jun;20(3):282-5
pubmed: 10823590
J Pediatr Orthop. 1987 Jul-Aug;7(4):389-94
pubmed: 3611333
J Pediatr Orthop. 2013 Jul-Aug;33(5):524-9
pubmed: 23752150
J Pediatr Orthop. 2003 Nov-Dec;23(6):733-9
pubmed: 14581776
J Pediatr Orthop. 1984 Mar;4(2):246-58
pubmed: 6699167
Aust N Z J Surg. 1980 Aug;50(4):393-401
pubmed: 6932853
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1987 Oct;69(8):1297-302
pubmed: 3312211
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1986 Mar;68(2):234-8
pubmed: 3514628
J Pediatr Orthop. 1990 Nov-Dec;10(6):769-76
pubmed: 2250063