Comparison of Outcome of Bone Autograft and Allograft in Union of Long Bone Fractures

1. Sadighi A, Sabetian A, Soltanmohammadlo F. A Comparison between Allograft and Autograft methods on the Rate of Union in Comminuted Fracture of Long Bones. Medical Journal of Tabriz University of Medical Sciences and Health Services. 2015;37(1):34-9.Search in Google Scholar

2. Boer C dP, Patka F, Bakker H, Haarman M. Current Concepts of Fracture Healing, Delayed Unions, and Nonunions. Osteo Trauma Care 2002;10(1):1-7.10.1055/s-2002-30627Search in Google Scholar

3. Tay BK, Patel VV, Bradford DS. Calcium sulfate- and calcium phosphate-based bone substitutes. Mimicry of the mineral phase of bone. Orthop Clin North Am. 1999;30(4):615-2310.1016/S0030-5898(05)70114-0Search in Google Scholar

4. Kainer MA, Linden JV, Whaley DN et al. Clostridium infections associated with musculoskeletal-tissue allografts. N Engl J Med. 2004;350(25):2564-71.10.1056/NEJMoa02322215201413Search in Google Scholar

5. Dorea HC, McLaughlin RM, Cantwell HD et al. Evaluation of healing in feline femoral defects filled with cancellous autograft, cancellous allograft or Bioglass. Veterinary and comparative orthopaedics and traumatology: VCOT. 2005;18(3):157-68.10.1055/s-0038-1632947Search in Google Scholar

6. Udupa KN, Prasad GC. Chemical and Histochemical Studies on the Organic Constituents in Fracture Repair in Rats. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1963;45(4):770-9.Search in Google Scholar

7. Laurencin C, Khan Y, El-Amin SF. Bone graft substitutes. Expert review of medical devices. 2006;3(1):49-57.10.1586/17434440.3.1.4916359252Search in Google Scholar

8. Nandi SK, Roy S, Mukherjee P et al. Orthopaedic applications of bone graft & graft substitutes: a review. Indian J Med Res. 2010;132:15-30.Search in Google Scholar

9. Babaei S, Changizy Ashtiani S. Comparative Assessment of the Healing process of Two Kinds of Endochondral Bone Allografts with each other and with Intramembranous Allografts Assisted by Double Deantigenization. RJMS. 2007;14(55):35-45.Search in Google Scholar

10. Işik M, Özdemir HM, Sakaoğullari A et al. The efficacy of in situ local autograft in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery: a comparison of three different grafting methods. Turkish journal of medical sciences, 2017;47(6):1728-35.10.3906/sag-1703-16629306231Search in Google Scholar

11. Tian P, Hu W-q, Li Z-j et al. Comparison of autograft and allograft tendons in posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A meta-analysis. Medicine. 2017;96(27).10.1097/MD.0000000000007434550218128682908Search in Google Scholar

12. Vining NC, Warme WJ, Mosca VS. Comparison of structural bone autografts and allografts in pediatric foot surgery. J Pediatr Orthop. 2012;32(7):714-8.10.1097/BPO.0b013e31824b6c8222955536Search in Google Scholar

13. McNeilan RJ, Everhart JS, Mescher PK et al. Graft Choice in Isolated Medial Patellofemoral Ligament Reconstruction: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis of Rates of Recurrent Instability and Patient-Reported Outcomes for Autograft, Allograft, and Synthetic Options. Arthroscopy. 2017.10.1016/j.arthro.2017.11.02729366741Search in Google Scholar

14. Muscolo DL, Ayerza MA, Tinao LAA, Ranalletta M. Distal femur osteoarticular allograft reconstruction after grade III open fractures in pediatric patients. J Orthop Trauma. 2004;18(5):312-5.10.1097/00005131-200405000-0000915105755Search in Google Scholar

15. Peyvandi M, Eshraghi R. Two case reports of widespread use of allografts in the treatment of open fractures of the femur. Journal of Medical Council of Islamic Republic of Iran. 2008;26(2):265-8.Search in Google Scholar

16. Samartzis D, Shen FH, Matthews DK et al. Comparison of allograft to autograft in multilevelanterior cervical discectomy and fusion with rigid plate fixation. The Spine Journal. 2003;3(6):451-9.10.1016/S1529-9430(03)00173-6Search in Google Scholar

17. Grier KM, Walling AK. The use of tricortical autograft versus allograft in lateral column lengthening for adult acquired flatfoot deformity: an analysis of union rates and complications. Foot Ankle Int. 2010;31(9):760-9.10.3113/FAI.2010.0760Search in Google Scholar

18. Xu W, Yang S, Li B et al. [Allogeneic cortical bone cage support combining with autologous cancellous bone grafting for managing femoral head necrosis]. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2009;23(5):527-9. [Article in Chinese]Search in Google Scholar

19. Kong Z, Tian D, Yu H et al. [Treatment of traumatic bone defect with graft material of allogenic cancellous combined with autologous red marrow]. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2008 Oct;22(10):1251-4. [Article in Chines].Search in Google Scholar

20. Rhodes J, Mansour A, Frickman A et al. Comparison of Allograft and Bovine Xenograft in Calcaneal Lengthening Osteotomy for Flatfoot Deformity in Cerebral Palsy. J Pediatr. Orthop. 2017;37(3):e202-e8.10.1097/BPO.0000000000000822Search in Google Scholar

21. Hudgens JL, Gillette BP, Krych AJ et al. Allograft versus autograft in posterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: an evidence-based systematic review. J Knee Surg. 2013;26(02):109-16.10.1055/s-0032-1319778Search in Google Scholar

22. Moore WR, Graves SE, Bain GI. Synthetic bone graft substitutes. ANZ J Surg. 2001;71(6):354-61.10.1046/j.1440-1622.2001.02128.xSearch in Google Scholar

23. Behairy Y Jasty M. Bone grafts and bone substitutes in hip and knee surgery. Orthopedic Clinics. 1999;30(4):661-71.10.1016/S0030-5898(05)70118-8Search in Google Scholar

24. Greenwald AS, Boden SD, Goldberg VM et al. Bone-graft substitutes: facts, fictions, and applications. JBJS. 2001;83:98–103.10.2106/00004623-200100022-0000711712842Search in Google Scholar