2009Journal of Neurosurgery SpineRequires access

Use of allograft bone for posterior C1–2 fusion

Virany Hillard, Daniel R. Fassett, Michael A. Finn, Ronald I. Apfelbaum

Open publisher page 46 citations

Abstract

OBJECT: An iliac crest autograft is the gold standard for bone grafting in posterior atlantoaxial arthrodesis but can be associated with significant donor-site morbidity. Conversely, an allograft has historically performed suboptimally for atlantoaxial arthrodesis as an onlay graft. The authors have modified a bone grafting technique to allow placement of a bicortical iliac crest allograft in an interpositional manner, and they evaluated it as an alternative to an autograft in posterior atlantoaxial arthrodesis. METHODS: The records of 89 consecutive patients in whom C1-2 arthrodesis was performed between 2001 and 2005 were reviewed. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients underwent 48 atlantoaxial arthrodeses with an allograft (mean follow-up 16.1 months, range 0-49 months), and 42 patients underwent autograft bone grafting (mean follow-up 17.6 months, range 0-61.0 months). The operative time was 50 minutes shorter in the allograft (mean 184 minutes, range 106-328 minutes) than in the autograft procedure (mean 234 minutes, range 154-358 minutes), and the estimated blood loss was 50% lower in the allograft group than in the autograft group (mean 103 ml [range 30-200 ml] vs mean 206 ml [range 50-400 ml], respectively). Bone incorporation was initially slower in the allograft than in the autograft group but equalized by 12 months postprocedure. The respective fusion rates after 24 months were 96.7 and 88.9% for autografts and allografts. Complications at the donor site occurred in 16.7% of the autograft patients, including 1 pelvic fracture, 1 retained sponge, 1 infection, 2 hernias requiring repair, 2 hematomas, and persistent pain. CONCLUSIONS: The authors describe a technique for interpositional bone grafting between C-1 and C-2 that allows for the use of an allograft with excellent fusion results. This technique reduced the operative time and blood loss and eliminated donor-site morbidity.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

OBJECT: An iliac crest autograft is the gold standard for bone grafting in posterior atlantoaxial arthrodesis but can be associated with significant donor-site morbidity. Conversely, an allograft has historically performed suboptimally for atlantoaxial arthrodesis as an onlay graft. The authors have modified a bone grafting technique to allow placement of a bicortical iliac crest allograft in an interpositional manner, and they evaluated it as an alternative to an autograft in posterior atlantoaxial arthrodesis. METHODS: The records of 89 consecutive patients in whom C1-2 arthrodesis was performed between 2001 and 2005 were reviewed. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients underwent 48 atlantoaxial arthrodeses with an allograft (mean follow-up 16.1 months, range 0-49 months), and 42 patients underwent autograft bone grafting (mean follow-up 17.6 months, range 0-61.0 months). The operative time was 50 minutes shorter in the allograft (mean 184 minutes, range 106-328 minutes) than in the autograft procedure (mean 234 minutes, range 154-358 minutes), and the estimated blood loss was 50% lower in the allograft group than in the autograft group (mean 103 ml [range 30-200 ml] vs mean 206 ml [range 50-400 ml], respectively). Bone incorporation was initially slower in the allograft than in the autograft group but equalized by 12 months postprocedure. The respective fusion rates after 24 months were 96.7 and 88.9% for autografts and allografts. Complications at the donor site occurred in 16.7% of the autograft patients, including 1 pelvic fracture, 1 retained sponge, 1 infection, 2 hernias requiring repair, 2 hematomas, and persistent pain. CONCLUSIONS: The authors describe a technique for interpositional bone grafting between C-1 and C-2 that allows for the use of an allograft with excellent fusion results. This technique reduced the operative time and blood loss and eliminated donor-site morbidity.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 46 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

OBJECT: An iliac crest autograft is the gold standard for bone grafting in posterior atlantoaxial arthrodesis but can be associated with significant donor-site morbidity. Conversely, an allograft has historically performed suboptimally for atlantoaxial arthrodesis as an onlay graft. The authors have modified a bone grafting technique to allow placement of a bicortical iliac crest allograft in an interpositional manner, and they evaluated it as an alternative to an autograft in posterior atlantoaxial arthrodesis. METHODS: The records of 89 consecutive patients in whom C1-2 arthrodesis was performed between 2001 and 2005 were reviewed. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients underwent 48 atlantoaxial arthrodeses with an allograft (mean follow-up 16.1 months, range 0-49 months), and 42 patients underwent autograft bone grafting (mean follow-up 17.6 months, range 0-61.0 months). The operative time was 50 minutes shorter in the allograft (mean 184 minutes, range 106-328 minutes) than in the autograft procedure (mean 234 minutes, range 154-358 minutes), and the estimated blood loss was 50% lower in the allograft group than in the autograft group (mean 103 ml [range 30-200 ml] vs mean 206 ml [range 50-400 ml], respectively). Bone incorporation was initially slower in the allograft than in the autograft group but equalized by 12 months postprocedure. The respective fusion rates after 24 months were 96.7 and 88.9% for autografts and allografts. Complications at the donor site occurred in 16.7% of the autograft patients, including 1 pelvic fracture, 1 retained sponge, 1 infection, 2 hernias requiring repair, 2 hematomas, and persistent pain. CONCLUSIONS: The authors describe a technique for interpositional bone grafting between C-1 and C-2 that allows for the use of an allograft with excellent fusion results. This technique reduced the operative time and blood loss and eliminated donor-site morbidity.

Key concepts: Medicine, Iliac crest, Surgery, Arthrodesis, Bone grafting, Spinal fusion, Transplantation, Pathology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Use of allograft bone for posterior C1–2 fusion — Research Paper | ScholarLens