Outcomes and complications of the reamer irrigator aspirator versus traditional iliac crest bone graft harvesting: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology

Ernesto Torsiello¹  Francesco Cuozzo¹  Nicola Maffulli²  Francesco Oliva³  Filippo Migliorini⁴  Frank Hildebrand⁴ 

[1] Department of Musculoskeletal Disorders, Faculty of Medicine and Surgery, University of Salerno, 84084, Baronissi, Italy;Department of Musculoskeletal Disorders, Faculty of Medicine and Surgery, University of Salerno, 84084, Baronissi, Italy;Centre for Sports and Exercise Medicine, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Mile End Hospital, 275 Bancroft Road, E1 4DG, London, England;School of Pharmacy and Biotechnology, Keele University School of Medicine, Thornburrow Drive, Stoke-on-Trent, England;Department of Musculoskeletal Disorders, Faculty of Medicine and Surgery, University of Salerno, 84084, Baronissi, Italy;Clinica Ortopedica, Ospedale San Giovanni di Dio e Ruggi d’Aragona, 84131, Salerno, Italy;Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, RWTH University Hospital Aachen, Pauwelsstraße 31, 52074, Aachen, Germany;

关键词: Reamer;    Irrigator;    Aspirator;    RIA;    Iliac;    Crest;    Bone;    Graft;    ICBG;    Nonunion;    Autologous;    Bone;    Graft;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s10195-021-00612-9

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundThe reamer irrigator aspirator (RIA) is a relatively recent device that is placed in the medullary canal of long bones to harvest a large volume of bone marrow, which is collected in a filtered canister. This study compares outcomes and complications of the RIA versus a traditional iliac crest bone graft (ICBG) for the treatment of bone defects.MethodsThis meta-analysis was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. The Embase, Google Scholar, PubMed, and Scopus databases were accessed in June 2021. All clinical trials comparing the RIA and ICBG with a minimum of 6 months follow-up were included.ResultsData from 4819 patients were collected. The RIA group demonstrated lower site pain (P < 0.0001), fewer infections (P = 0.001), and a lower rate of adverse events (P < 0.0001). The ICBG group demonstrated a greater rate of bone union (P < 0.0001). There was no difference between groups in VAS (P = 0.09) and mean time to union (P = 0.06).ConclusionThe current evidence supports the use of the RIA, given its low morbidity and short learning curve.

【 授权许可】

CC BY