A Retrospective Analysis of Outcomes From Foot and Ankle Arthrodesis and Open Reduction and Internal Fixation Using Cellular Bone Allograft Augmentation
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online August, 2022
A Retrospective Analysis of Outcomes From Foot and Ankle Arthrodesis and Open Reduction and Internal Fixation Using Cellular Bone Allograft Augmentation
ViviGen is an allogeneic cellular bone matrix product containing lineage-committed bone cells, and can be used as an alternative to autograft bone or other augments to aid in arthrodesis or to enhance bony healing in open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) procedures.
Methods
This study included 153 consecutive patients undergoing ankle, midfoot, or hindfoot arthrodesis or ORIF procedures from January 2017 to October 2018, in which an allogeneic cellular bone matrix product was used to aid in bony healing. Retrospective chart review identified patient demographic factors and medical comorbidities and evaluated clinical and radiographic data to determine fusion/union rate and complications.
Results
The overall fusion rate for the arthrodesis cohort was 97/113 (85.8%). The overall complication rate in this cohort was 22/113 (19.5%). Smokers had significantly lower rates of fusion compared with nonsmokers (P = .01). The observed bony healing rate for the ORIF cohort was 19/22 (86.4%), with a complication rate of 3/22 (13.6%).
Conclusion
With satisfactory fusion rates and relatively few complications, our findings suggest that ViviGen is a safe and efficacious alternative to other forms of bone graft augmentation for fusion and ORIF procedures about the foot and ankle. Further study is needed to compare the efficacy of ViviGen with autograft bone and other augments.
MuscarellaVSadriSPusateriJ.Indications and considerations of foot and ankle arthrodesis. Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2012;29:1-9. doi:10.1016/j.cpm.2011.09.001
2.
BestMJBullerLTMirandaA.National trends in foot and ankle arthrodesis: 17-year analysis of the National Survey of Ambulatory Surgery and National Hospital Discharge Survey. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2015;54:1037-1041. doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2015.04.023
3.
ClainMRBaxterDE.Simultaneous calcaneocuboid and talonavicular fusion. Long-term follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2018;76:133-136. doi:10.1302/0301-620x.76b1.8300657
FreyCHalikusNMvu-RoseTEbramzadehE.A review of ankle arthrodesis: predisposing factors to nonunion. Foot Ankle Int. 1994;15:581-584. doi:10.1177/107110079401501102
6.
ScrantonPE.Use of internal compression in arthrodesis of the ankle. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1985;67:550-555. doi:10.2106/00004623-198567040-00008
7.
ToolanBCSangeorzanBJHansenSTJr.Complex reconstruction for the treatment of dorsolateral peritalar subluxation of the foot. Early results after distraction arthrodesis of the calcaneocuboid joint in conjunction with stabilization of, and transfer of the flexor digitorum longus tendon to, the midfoot to treat acquired pes planovalgus in adults. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999;81:1545-1560. doi:10.2106/00004623-199911000-00006
8.
HollawellSM.Allograft cellular bone matrix as an alternative to autograft in hindfoot and ankle fusion procedures. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2012;51:222-225. doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2011.10.001
9.
RobertsTTRosenbaumAJ.Bone grafts, bone substitutes and orthobiologics: the bridge between basic science and clinical advancements in fracture healing. Organogenesis. 2012;8:114-124. doi:10.4161/org.23306
10.
SkovrljBGuzmanJZAl MaaiehMChoSKIatridisJCQureshiSA.Cellular bone matrices: viable stem cell-containing bone graft substitutes. Spine J. 2014;14:2763-2772. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2014.05.024
11.
GrabowskiGRobertsonR.Bone allograft with mesenchymal stem cells: a critical review of the literature. Hard Tissue. 2013;2:20. doi:10.13172/2050-2303-2-2-438
12.
ArringtonEDSmithWJChambersHGBucknellALDavinoNA.Complications of iliac crest bone graft harvesting. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;(329):300-309. doi:10.1097/00003086-199608000-00037
13.
BanwartJCAsherMAHassaneinRS.Iliac crest bone graft harvest donor site morbidity: a statistical evaluation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1995;20:1055-1060.
14.
SummersBNEisensteinSM.Donor site pain from the ilium. A complication of lumbar spine fusion. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2018;71:677-680. doi:10.1302/0301-620x.71b4.2768321
15.
HowardJMGlassmanSDCarreonLY.Posterior iliac crest pain after posterolateral fusion with or without iliac crest graft harvest. Spine J. 2011;11:534-537. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2010.09.001
16.
DiviSNMikhaelMM.Use of allogenic mesenchymal cellular bone matrix in anterior and posterior cervical spinal fusion: a case series of 21 patients. Asian Spine J. 2017;11:454-462. doi:10.4184/asj.2017.11.3.454
17.
CorsoKEtterKMenzieABhattacharyyaSPracykJB.Characteristics and rate of subsequent lumbar spine fusion surgery among patients treated with allogenic cellular bone matrix for posterior lumbar spinal fusion. Value Health. 2018;21(suppl 1):S106. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2018.04.714
RushSMHamiltonGAAckersonLM.Mesenchymal stem cell allograft in revision foot and ankle surgery: a clinical and radiographic analysis. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2009;48:163-169. doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2008.12.008
20.
DekkerTJWhitePAdamsSB.Efficacy of a cellular bone allograft for foot and ankle arthrodesis and revision nonunion procedures. Foot Ankle Int. 2017;38:277-282. doi:10.1177/1071100716674977
21.
AndersonJJBooneJJHansenMBradyCGoughASwayzeeZ.Ankle arthrodesis fusion rates for mesenchymal stem cell bone allograft versus proximal tibia autograft. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2014;53:683-686. doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2014.06.029
22.
LareauCRDerenMEFantryADonahueRMJDiGiovanniCW.Does autogenous bone graft work? A logistic regression analysis of data from 159 papers in the foot and ankle literature. Foot Ankle Surg. 2015;21:150-159. doi:10.1016/j.fas.2015.03.008
AmmermanJMLibriczJAmmermanMD.The role of Osteocel Plus as a fusion substrate in minimally invasive instrumented transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2013;115:991-994. doi:10.1016/j.clineuro.2012.10.013
25.
TohmehAGWatsonBTohmehMZielinskiXJ.Allograft cellular bone matrix in extreme lateral interbody fusion: preliminary radiographic and clinical outcomes. ScienceWorldJournal. 2012;2012:263637. doi:10.1100/2012/263637
26.
EastlackRKGarfinSRBrownCRMeyerSC.Osteocel plus cellular allograft in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014;39:E1331-E1337. doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000000557
27.
KerrEJ3rdJawaharAWootenTKaySCavanaughDANunleyPD.The use of osteo-conductive stem-cells allograft in lumbar interbody fusion procedures: an alternative to recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein. J Surg Orthop Adv. 2011;20:193-197.
28.
ScottRTHyerCF.Role of cellular allograft containing mesenchymal stem cells in high-risk foot and ankle reconstructions. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2013;52:32-35. doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2012.09.004
29.
JonesCPLovelandJAtkinsonBLRyabyJTLinovitzRJNunleyJA.Prospective, multicenter evaluation of allogeneic bone matrix containing viable osteogenic cells in foot and/or ankle arthrodesis. Foot Ankle Int. 2015;36:1129-1137. doi:10.1177/1071100715586181
30.
BroskyTAMenkeCRDXenosD.Reconstruction of the first metatarsophalangeal joint following post-cheilectomy avascular necrosis of the first metatarsal head: a case report. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2009;48:61-69. doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2008.10.002
31.
ClementsJR.Use of allograft cellular bone matrix in multistage talectomy with tibiocalcaneal arthrodesis: a case report. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2012;51:83-86. doi:10.1053/j.jfas.2011.09.002
32.
RoukisTS.Use of living cellular bone matrix for treating a failed ankle arthroplasty: an abbreviated technique and case study. Clin Res Foot Ankle. 2018;6:282. doi:10.4172/2329-910x.1000282
33.
RoukisTSSamsellB.A new approach to ankle and foot arthrodesis procedures using a living cellular bone matrix: a case series. Clin Res Foot Ankle. 2018;6:274. doi:10.4172/2329-910x.1000274
34.
MagnusMKIcemanKLRoukisTS.Living cryopreserved bone allograft as an adjunct for hindfoot arthrodesis. Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2018;35:295-310. doi:10.1016/j.cpm.2018.02.002
35.
TuchendlerDBolanowskiM.The influence of thyroid dysfunction on bone metabolism. Thyroid Res. 2014;7:12. doi:10.1186/s13044-014-0012-0
36.
LauingKLRoperPMNauerRKCallaciJJ.Acute alcohol exposure impairs fracture healing and deregulates β-catenin signaling in the fracture callus. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2012;36:2095-2103. doi:10.1111/j.1530-0277.2012.01830.x
37.
TopferLASpryC.New technologies for the treatment of peripheral artery disease. In: CADTH Issues in Emerging Health Technologies. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health; 2016.
38.
ChaudharySBLiporaceFAGandhiADonleyBGPinzurMSLinSS.Complications of ankle fracture in patients with diabetes. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2008;16:159-170.
39.
MaceraACarulliCSirleoLInnocentiM.Postoperative complications and reoperation rates following open reduction and internal fixation of ankle fracture. Joints. 2018;6:110-115. doi:10.1055/s-0038-1653949
40.
LachmanJRRamosJAAdamsSBNunleyJA2ndEasleyMEDeOrioJK.Patient-reported outcomes before and after primary and revision total ankle arthroplasty. Foot Ankle Int. 2019;40:34-41. doi:10.1177/1071100718794956
41.
CerratoRAAiyerAACampbellJJengCLMyersonMS.Reproducibility of computed tomography to evaluate ankle and hindfoot fusions. Foot Ankle Int. 2014;35:1176-1180. doi:10.1177/1071100714544521
