Results of surgical alloplasty for bone defects of various locations due to distal humerus fractures

Introduction Currently, up to 30 % of cases after surgical treatment in distal humerus fractures result in permanent disability. It is important to improve the surgical techniques to ensure the restoration of the anatomical integrity of this department.

The aim of the work was to perform a comparative analysis of the results of surgical plasty with donor block and cubic cadaver allografts for bone defects of various locations in the distal humerus fractures based on an assessment of bone density and vascularization of the grafted area.

Materials and methods The study involved 56 patients with distal humerus fractures, divided into three groups based on the defect location and two subgroups depending on the method of surgical plastic surgery. A comparative analysis of treatment outcomes was conducted based on the values of the vascularization index of the defect zone obtained by ultrasound study, as well as the Hounsfield index values obtained by computed tomography of the damaged segment. The allograft area was assessed in three zones of interest, the central, marginal and native bone structures.

Results The use of a block allograft provided increase in the values of the Hounsfield index 3 months after surgery in the central graft zone with a defect in the medial column to a value of 190HU (p = 0.01),with a lateral defect to 185HU (p = 0.01), with a central defect to 170HU (p = 0.03); increased the values of the Hounsfield index in the marginal zone 3 months after surgery, the graft area with a medial defect was 210HU (p = 0.01), a lateral defect was 200 HU (p = 0.01), and a central defect was 185 HU (p = 0.02). It provided the increase in the values of the vascularization index of the graft zone with a defect in the medial column by 1.2 times (p = 0.01), in the lateral column by 1.15 times (p = 0.01), in the central zone by 1.18 times (p = 0.02).

Discussion The results of the study indicate that the use of a block allograft increases the density of bone tissue in the marginal and central zones of defect grafting area 3 months after surgery, more expressed if it is localized in the medial and lateral columns, and increases the intensity of blood flow in the defect grafting area 2 months after surgery.

Conclusion Comparison of the results of plastic surgery for post-traumatic bone defects in comminuted fractures of the distal humerus showed the advantage of using native block allograft in defects of the lateral and medial columns due to the optimization of osteointegration processes in the defect zone in the mediumterm postoperative period.

1. Chibirov GM, Soldatov YuP. Treatment of patients with the elbow function disorder accompanied by posttraumatic pseudoarthrosis of humeral condyle. Genij Ortopedii. 2013;(3):80-81. (In Russ.)

2. Gritsyuk AA, Lychagin AV, Kryukov EV, et al. Peculiarities of elbow joint replacement in case of wounds and injuries: long-term results. Military Medical Journal. 2017; 338(12): 37-44. (In Russ.) doi: 10.17816/RMMJ73433.

3. Khodzhanov IY, Borzunov DY, Bayimbetov GD. Treatment of children with multiple injuries of the bones forming the elbow joint. Genij Ortopedii. 2023;29(1):12-19. doi: 10.18019/1028-4427-2023-29-1-12-19.

4. Popkov AV, Popkov DA. Biocompatible implants in orthopedics: bone tissue engineering. Genij Ortopedii. 2023;29(6):662668. doi: 10.18019/1028-4427-2023-29-6-662-668.

5. Borzunov DYu, Gilmanov RT. Promising osteoplastic materials and surgical technologies in reconstructive treatment of patients with bone nonunion and defects. GenijOrtopedii. 2024;30(2):263-272. doi: 10.18019/1028-4427-2024-30-2-263-272.

6. Molenaars RJ, Schoolmeesters BJA, Viveen J, et al. There is a role for allografts in reconstructive surgery of the elbow and forearm. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019;27(6):1840-1846. doi: 10.1007/s00167-018-5221-y.

7. Kirilova IA, Sharkeev YuP, Podorozhnaya VT, et al. Structural and functional studies of bioobjects prepared from femoral heads. AIP Conf. Proc. 2015;1688(1): 030005. doi: 10.1063/1.4936000.

8. Eremin AV, Sorokin GV, Gorgun AA, et al. Adhesive properties of natural and artificial osteoplastic materials. Department of Traumatology and Orthopedics. 2014;(2):11-15. (In Russ.)

9. Davydov AP, Petrov AB. Method of plastic surgery of post-traumatic periarticular defects of long tubular bones (variants). Patent RF, no. 2798904. Bulletin No. 19. 2023. Available at: https://www.fips.ru/registers-doc-view/fips_servlet?DB=RUPAT&DocNumber=2798904&TypeFile=html. Accessed May 23, 2025. (In Russ.)

10. Moreno M, Amaral MH, Lobo JM, Silva AC. Scaffolds for Bone Regeneration: State of the Art. Curr Pharm Des. 2016;22(18):2726-2736. doi: 10.2174/1381612822666160203114902.

11. Sletov A. A., Zhidovinov A. V., Mozheiko R. A. Comparative analysis of the effectiveness of visual methods of diagnosis in patients with osteonecrosis and aseptic osteomyelitis of jaw bones. Journal of Volgograd State medical university. 2017;(1):78-81. (In Russ.)

12. Vasyliev R, Oksymets V, Rodnichenko A, et al. Tissue engineering-based approach for restoration of combat related critical sized bone defects. Cytotherapy. 2017;19(5):223-224.

13. Rerikh VV, Predein YuA, Bataev VА, et al. Formation of a bone block during interbody fusion with an osteograft and autobone in conditions of fixation of a spinal segment with ceramic implants in experiment. Modern Problems of Science and Education. 2020;(5):131-133. (In Russ.) doi: 10.17513/spno.30221.

14. Misch CE. The implant quality scale: a clinical assessment of the health--disease continuum. Oral Health. 1998;88(7):1520, 23-25; quiz 25-26.

15. Kormilina AR, Tukhbatullin MG. Capabilities of multiparametric ultrasound in assessing bone callus maturation. Proceedings of the XV All-Russian National Congress of Radiation Diagnosticians and Therapists "Radiology-2021". Moscow: MEDI Expo; 2021:46-47. (In Russ.) URL: https://www.mediexpo.ru/fileadmin/user_upload/content/pdf/rad2021--abstracts.pdf.

16. Kormilina AR. Multiparametric ultrasound examination of long tubular bone fractures: Cand. Diss. Kazan; 2016:123. Available from: https://www.dissercat.com/content/multiparametricheskoe-ultrazvukovoe-issledovanie-priperelomakh-dlinnykh-trubchatykh-kostei. Accessed May 23, 2025. (In Russ.)

17. Nicholson JA, Tsang STJ, MacGillivray TJ, et al. What is the role of ultrasound in fracture management?: Diagnosis and therapeutic potential for fractures, delayed unions, and fracture-related infection. Bone Joint Res. 2019;8(7):304312. doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.87.BJR-2018-0215.R2.

18. Cocco G, Ricci V, Villani M, et al. Ultrasound imaging of bone fractures. Insights Imaging. 2022;13(1):189. doi: 10.1186/ s13244-022-01335-z.

19. Kennedy OD, Herman BC, Laudier DM, et al. Activation of resorption in fatigue-loaded bone involves both apoptosis and active pro-osteoclastogenic signaling by distinct osteocyte populations. Bone. 2012;50(5):1115-1122. doi: 10.1016/j. bone.2012.01.025.

20. D’yachkov AN, Migalkin NS, Stogov MV, et al. Safety and Effectiveness of Using Double-Ended Allograft in the Repair of Large Defects of Bi-Epiphyseal Bones in Experiment. IP Pavlov Russian Medical Biological Herald. 2022;30(2):139148. doi: 10.17816/PAVLOVJ100480.

21. Tipton S, Nunez FA, Vazquez FAN, et al. Reconstruction of Distal Humerus Fractures with Severe Bone Loss: A Case Series and Review of the Literature. J Surg Orthop Adv. 2020;29(2):65-72.

22. Chesnokov SA, Kovylin RS, Yudin VV, et al. Bone substituting materials based on oligoether methacrylates. Oligomers-2024: Proceedings of the XX International Conference on the Chemistry and Physicochemistry of Oligomers. Plenary lectures. Chernogolovka: FRC PCF and MCh RAS; 2024;(1):178-200. Available from: https://oligomers.ru/wpcontent/uploads/2024/09/Сборник-Том1-2024_c.pdf. Accessed May 23, 2025. (In Russ.)

23. Shibuya N, Jupiter DC. Bone graft substitute: allograft and xenograft. Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2015;32(1):21-34. doi: 10.1016/j.cpm.2014.09.011.

24. Misch CE. Bone character: second vital implant criterion. Dent Today.1988;7:39-40.

25. Yezhov MY, Yezhov IY, Kashko AK. Unresolved issues of the cartilage and the bone regeneration (review). Advances in current natural sciences. 2015;(5):126-131. (In Russ.) URL: https://natural-sciences.ru/ru/article/view?id=35113.

26. Kirilenko SI, Nikolaev VI, Nadyrov EA, et al. Results of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using new method ofspine fusion. Meditsinskie novosti. 2022;(3):69-72. (In Russ.)

27. Netsvetov PV, Khudyaev AT, Dyachkova GV, et al. The role of computed tomography in assessing the density of the bone block of the damaged segment of the spine at different stages of treatment with an external transpedicular fixation device. Bulletin of Roentgenology and Radiology. 2007;(2):23-26. (In Russ.)

28. Chernyaev VS, Fomenko MA, Tsygankova AV. Clinical aspects of modern radiation diagnostics in traumatology and orthopedics. Trends in the development of science and education. 2021;71:65-68. (In Russ.) doi: 10.18411/lj-03-2021-15.

29. Diachkova GV, Mitina YuL, Diachkov KA, et al. Clinical aspects of current radial diagnostics in traumatology and orthopaedics. Genij Ortopedii. 2011;(2):84-90. (In Russ.)

30. Burr DB. Bone quality: understanding what matters. J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact. 2004;4(2):184-186.

31. Rozhinskaya L.Ya. Concept of bone quality: influence of antiresorptive drugs on bone quality parameters. Osteoporosis and osteopathy. 2003;3:25-29. (In Russ.)

32. Aleksandrov SM. Multislice computed tomography in determining bone quality in patients with chronic osteomyelitis: Cand. Diss. St. Petersburg; 2016:172. Available from: https://www.dslib.net/luch-diagnostika/multisrezovaja-kompjuternajatomografija-v-opredelenii-kachestva-kosti-u-bolnyh-s.html. Accessed May 23, 2025. (In Russ.)