Scholarlink

Background <p>Reconstruction of critical-sized long bone defects is a complex orthopedic challenge. Free fibular grafts, vascularized (FVFG) and nonvascularized (NVFG), are established reconstructive options, but comparative clinical outcomes remain uncertain.</p> Purpose <p>To compare clinical and radiological outcomes of FVFG and NVFG in patients with post-traumatic critical bone defects more than 10&#xa0;cm.</p> Methods <p>A randomized controlled trial was conducted with 50 patients assigned equally to FVFG or NVFG groups. The primary outcome was time to union, while secondary outcomes included graft hypertrophy, functional scores (DASH and LEFS), complication rates, and donor site morbidity.</p> Results <p>The mean time to union was 5.78&#xa0;months in the FVFG group and 6.17&#xa0;months in the NVFG group, showing no statistically significant difference (<i>p</i> = 0.447). Rates of graft hypertrophy, functional recovery, and complications were comparable between the groups.</p> Conclusions <p>Both FVFG and NVFG provide effective reconstruction for critical bone defects, with nearly similar healing times and functional outcomes. NVFG may represent a less complex alternative in selected cases.</p> <p>Level of evidence I.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Vascularized versus nonvascularized free fibular grafts in reconstruction of post-traumatic critical long bone defects, a comparative study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月24日

查看全文
  • Amro A. Fouaad,
  • Abdel-Hakiem Massoud,
  • Mohamed Shaban,
  • Mahmoud Abdel-Naby,
  • Mohamed I. Abulsoud

摘要

Background

Reconstruction of critical-sized long bone defects is a complex orthopedic challenge. Free fibular grafts, vascularized (FVFG) and nonvascularized (NVFG), are established reconstructive options, but comparative clinical outcomes remain uncertain.

Purpose

To compare clinical and radiological outcomes of FVFG and NVFG in patients with post-traumatic critical bone defects more than 10 cm.

Methods

A randomized controlled trial was conducted with 50 patients assigned equally to FVFG or NVFG groups. The primary outcome was time to union, while secondary outcomes included graft hypertrophy, functional scores (DASH and LEFS), complication rates, and donor site morbidity.

Results

The mean time to union was 5.78 months in the FVFG group and 6.17 months in the NVFG group, showing no statistically significant difference (p = 0.447). Rates of graft hypertrophy, functional recovery, and complications were comparable between the groups.

Conclusions

Both FVFG and NVFG provide effective reconstruction for critical bone defects, with nearly similar healing times and functional outcomes. NVFG may represent a less complex alternative in selected cases.

Level of evidence I.