The role of bone void fillers in medial opening wedge high tibial osteotomy: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: A variety of bone void filling materials and methods are available in opening medial wedge HTO (OWHTO). The pertinent question revolves around if and when bone void fillers are needed. The primary purpose of this study was to systematically review outcomes and complications after OWHTO with and without the use of bone void fillers. METHODS: The EMBASE, PubMed\MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar databases were searched to identify articles that reported OWHTO results using different bone void fillers until March 2016. Only articles reporting the exact bone void filler type, the opening gap size and the fixation method were included. The extracted data included the study design, demographic data, the radiological and clinical results and complication rates. Outcomes were analysed with regard to bone void filler type, and comparison was made between the groups (allograft, autograft, synthetic bone void filler and OWHTO without bone void filling). RESULTS: Twenty-two articles reporting the results of 1421 OWHTO met the inclusion criteria. In total, 647 osteotomies were completed with allogeneic graft as bone void filler, 367 with synthetic materials, 199 with autograft and 208 without any bone void filling material. The maximum opening gap size was similar in all groups with mean of 9.8 mm (range 4-17.5 mm). Locking plate fixation was used in 90 % of the osteotomies that were completed without bone void filler, while all allograft cases and more then 90 % of the autograft cases were done with non-locking systems. The highest rates of non-union (1.1 %) were seen in the synthetic group, compared to 0.5 % in the all the other groups. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review showed no definitive advantages for OWHTO with any bone void filler in terms of union rates and loss of correction. Moreover, the use of autografts or allografts showed more favourable outcomes than synthetic bone substitutes. OWHTO with gaps smaller then 10 mm and rigid fixation might be successfully managed without bone grafting. However, when bone grafting is needed, autograft bone provides higher rates of clinical and radiographic union. The use of synthetic bone substitutes in OWHTO cannot be recommended. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".