Bone Banking in a Traumatologic Department: A Ten-Year Analysis

Vetter Sven Y.; Raible Carsten; Aytac Sara; Grützner Paul Alfred; Frank Christian B

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ijbmr.20140203.11

| Peer-Reviewed

Bone Banking in a Traumatologic Department: A Ten-Year Analysis

Vetter Sven Y., Raible Carsten, Aytac Sara, Grützner Paul Alfred, Frank Christian B

Published in International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research (Volume 2, Issue 3)

Received: 10 December 2013 Accepted: 3 November 2014 Published: 6 January 2015

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Background: Orthopedic and traumatologic departments have the choice of conducting an own bone bank in which grafts are prepared and stored, or purchasing costly bone grafts from professional providers. The aim of the study was to retrospectively analyse the bone bank affiliated with the traumatology department in the ten-year time period from 2001-2010. Patients and Methods: Altogether 1035 patients who underwent a primary hip replacement were included as potential donors. 632 patients were treated with a coxarthritis (CA) and 403 with a femoral neck fracture (FNF). Results: The bone donation was deferred in 731 (70,6%) and conducted in 304 (29,4%) patients. The majority of the deferrals were due to the maturity (age above 75 years) of the patients and an osteoporotic bone structure of the graft. Other reasons for deferral were a positive donor history, incomplete donation documents, and previous osteosynthesis of the proximal femur or acetabulum. The rate for exclusion was significantly higher in the FNF group, which was based on the difference of age, bone structure quality, and the non-elective setting of the operative treatment. Conclusion: In summary, bone donations from urgently hospitalised patients with a FNF have a significantly higher deferral rate than electively planned patients with CA.

Published in	International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research (Volume 2, Issue 3)
DOI	10.11648/j.ijbmr.20140203.11
Page(s)	15-20
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Bone Banking, Bone Graft, Bone Donation

References

[1]	Gamradt S, Liebermann J. Bone graft for hip arthorplasty; biology and future applications. Clinical Orthopedics 2003;417:183-94
[2]	Stevenson S. Enhancement of fracture healing with autogenous and allogenic bone grafts. Clin Orthop Rel Res 1998;355:239-46
[3]	Friedlaender G. Bone grafts. The basic science rationale for clinical applications. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1987;69:786-90
[4]	Mankin H, Gebhardt M, Jennings L, et al. Long-term results of allograft replacement on the management of bone tumors. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1996;324:86-97
[5]	Raizmann N, O´Brien J, Poehling-Monaghan K, et al. Pseudarthrosis of the spine. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2009;17:494-503
[6]	Slooff T, Buma P, Schreurs B, et al. Acetabular and femoral reconstruction with impacted graft and cement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1996;324:108-15
[7]	Macewen W. Observations concerning transplation on bone. Proc R Soc London 1881;32:232-46
[8]	Robertsson O, Stefánsdóttir, A; Lidgren, L; Ranstam, J. Increased long-term mortality in patients less than 55 years old who have undergone knee replacement for osteoarthritis. J Bone and Joint Surg Br 2007;89:599 - 603
[9]	Summers B, Eisenstein S. Donor site pain from the ilium. A complication of lumbar spine fusion. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1989;71:677-80
[10]	Elves M, Pratt L. The pattern of new bone formation in isografts of bone. Acta Orthopedic Scandinavia 1975;46:549-60
[11]	Urist M. Physiologic basis of bone-graft surgery; with special reference to the theory of induction. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1953;1:207-16
[12]	Bauer T, Mutschler G. Bone graft materials: An overview of the basic science. Clin Orthop Rel Res 2000;371:10-27
[13]	Palmer S, Gibbons C, Athansou N. The pathology of bone allograft. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1999;81:333-35
[14]	Sugihara S, van Ginkel A, Jiya T, et al. Histopathology of retrieved allografts of the femoral head. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1999;81:336-41
[15]	Galea G. An analysis of bone donor deferral rates in Scotland - a 6-year study. Transfusion Medicine an Hemotherapy 2011;38:373-78
[16]	Wilson P. Experiences with a bone bank. Annutation Surgery 1947;126(6):932-46
[17]	Zwitser E, Jiya T, Licher H, et al. Design and management of an orthopedic bone bank in the Netherlands. Cell Tissue Bank 2010;13:63-69
[18]	Pruss A, Katthagen B. Musculosceletal tissue banks. Legal foundations and graft safety. Orthopäde 2008;37:749–55
[19]	Bettin D, Doerr H, Gerlich W. Richtlinien zum Führen einer Knochenbank. Deutsches Ärzteblatt 2001;98:1011-16
[20]	Verdonk R, Almquist K, Verdonk P. Logistics and European laws on allogenic tissue transplantation. Orthopäde 2008;37:779-82
[21]	Knaepler H, von Garrel T, Seipp H, et al. Experimental studies of thermal disinfection and sterilization of allogenic bone transplants and their effects on biological viability. Unfallchirurg 1992;95:477-84
[22]	Matter H, Garrel T, Bilderbeek U, et al. Biomechanical examinations of cancellous bone concerning the influence of duration and temperature of cryopreservation. J Biomed Mater Res 2001;55:40-44
[23]	Pruss A, Seibold M, Benedix F. Validation of the "Marburg bone bank system" for thermodesinfection of allogenic femoral head transplants using selected bacteria, fungi and spores. Biologicals 2003;31:287-94
[24]	V. Garell T, Gotzen L. Allogenic bone transplantation and bone banking. Unfallchirurg 1998;101:713-27
[25]	Tomford W, Mankin H, Friedlaender G, et al. Methods of banking bone and cartilage for allograft transplantations. Orthop Clin North Am 1987;18:241-47
[26]	Flören M, Kappe T, Reichel H. Analysis of the effectiveness of an internal hospital bone bank. Orthopäde 2007;36:667-72
[27]	Pink F, Warwick R, Purkis J, et al. Donor exclusion in the national blood services living bone donor programme. Cell Tissue Bank 2006;7:11-21
[28]	Jung S, Wernerus D, Reichel H. Approval of a bone bank: an institution's experience. Orthopade 2012; 41: 217-224
[29]	Benninger E ZP, Kamath AF, Dora C. Cost analysis of fresh-frozen femoral head allografts: is it worthwhile to run a bone bank? Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B(10): 1307-1311

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Vetter Sven Y., Raible Carsten, Aytac Sara, Grützner Paul Alfred, Frank Christian B. (2015). Bone Banking in a Traumatologic Department: A Ten-Year Analysis. International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research, 2(3), 15-20. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijbmr.20140203.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Vetter Sven Y.; Raible Carsten; Aytac Sara; Grützner Paul Alfred; Frank Christian B. Bone Banking in a Traumatologic Department: A Ten-Year Analysis. Int. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 2015, 2(3), 15-20. doi: 10.11648/j.ijbmr.20140203.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Vetter Sven Y., Raible Carsten, Aytac Sara, Grützner Paul Alfred, Frank Christian B. Bone Banking in a Traumatologic Department: A Ten-Year Analysis. Int J Biomed Mater Res. 2015;2(3):15-20. doi: 10.11648/j.ijbmr.20140203.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijbmr.20140203.11,
  author = {Vetter Sven Y. and Raible Carsten and Aytac Sara and Grützner Paul Alfred and Frank Christian B},
  title = {Bone Banking in a Traumatologic Department: A Ten-Year Analysis},
  journal = {International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research},
  volume = {2},
  number = {3},
  pages = {15-20},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijbmr.20140203.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijbmr.20140203.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijbmr.20140203.11},
  abstract = {Background: Orthopedic and traumatologic departments have the choice of conducting an own bone bank in which grafts are prepared and stored, or purchasing costly bone grafts from professional providers. The aim of the study was to retrospectively analyse the bone bank affiliated with the traumatology department in the ten-year time period from 2001-2010. Patients and Methods: Altogether 1035 patients who underwent a primary hip replacement were included as potential donors. 632 patients were treated with a coxarthritis (CA) and 403 with a femoral neck fracture (FNF). Results: The bone donation was deferred in 731 (70,6%) and conducted in 304 (29,4%) patients. The majority of the deferrals were due to the maturity (age above 75 years) of the patients and an osteoporotic bone structure of the graft. Other reasons for deferral were a positive donor history, incomplete donation documents, and previous osteosynthesis of the proximal femur or acetabulum. The rate for exclusion was significantly higher in the FNF group, which was based on the difference of age, bone structure quality, and the non-elective setting of the operative treatment. Conclusion: In summary, bone donations from urgently hospitalised patients with a FNF have a significantly higher deferral rate than electively planned patients with CA.},
 year = {2015}
}

Copy | Download

TY - JOUR
T1 - Bone Banking in a Traumatologic Department: A Ten-Year Analysis
AU - Vetter Sven Y.
AU - Raible Carsten
AU - Aytac Sara
AU - Grützner Paul Alfred
AU - Frank Christian B
Y1 - 2015/01/06
PY - 2015
N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijbmr.20140203.11
DO - 10.11648/j.ijbmr.20140203.11
T2 - International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research
JF - International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research
JO - International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research
SP - 15
EP - 20
PB - Science Publishing Group
SN - 2330-7579
UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijbmr.20140203.11
AB - Background: Orthopedic and traumatologic departments have the choice of conducting an own bone bank in which grafts are prepared and stored, or purchasing costly bone grafts from professional providers. The aim of the study was to retrospectively analyse the bone bank affiliated with the traumatology department in the ten-year time period from 2001-2010. Patients and Methods: Altogether 1035 patients who underwent a primary hip replacement were included as potential donors. 632 patients were treated with a coxarthritis (CA) and 403 with a femoral neck fracture (FNF). Results: The bone donation was deferred in 731 (70,6%) and conducted in 304 (29,4%) patients. The majority of the deferrals were due to the maturity (age above 75 years) of the patients and an osteoporotic bone structure of the graft. Other reasons for deferral were a positive donor history, incomplete donation documents, and previous osteosynthesis of the proximal femur or acetabulum. The rate for exclusion was significantly higher in the FNF group, which was based on the difference of age, bone structure quality, and the non-elective setting of the operative treatment. Conclusion: In summary, bone donations from urgently hospitalised patients with a FNF have a significantly higher deferral rate than electively planned patients with CA.
VL - 2
IS - 3
ER -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Vetter Sven Y.

BG Trauma Center Ludwigshafen, Department for Trauma- and Reconstructive Surgery, Ludwig-Guttmannstr. 13, 67071 Ludwigshafen, University of Heidelberg, Germany
Raible Carsten

BG Trauma Center Ludwigshafen, Department for Trauma- and Reconstructive Surgery, Ludwig-Guttmannstr. 13, 67071 Ludwigshafen, University of Heidelberg, Germany
Aytac Sara

BG Trauma Center Ludwigshafen, Department for Trauma- and Reconstructive Surgery, Ludwig-Guttmannstr. 13, 67071 Ludwigshafen, University of Heidelberg, Germany
Grützner Paul Alfred

BG Trauma Center Ludwigshafen, Department for Trauma- and Reconstructive Surgery, Ludwig-Guttmannstr. 13, 67071 Ludwigshafen, University of Heidelberg, Germany
Frank Christian B

BG Trauma Center Ludwigshafen, Department for Trauma- and Reconstructive Surgery, Ludwig-Guttmannstr. 13, 67071 Ludwigshafen, University of Heidelberg, Germany

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Vetter Sven Y., Raible Carsten, Aytac Sara, Grützner Paul Alfred, Frank Christian B. (2015). Bone Banking in a Traumatologic Department: A Ten-Year Analysis. International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research, 2(3), 15-20. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijbmr.20140203.11

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Vetter Sven Y.; Raible Carsten; Aytac Sara; Grützner Paul Alfred; Frank Christian B. Bone Banking in a Traumatologic Department: A Ten-Year Analysis. Int. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 2015, 2(3), 15-20. doi: 10.11648/j.ijbmr.20140203.11

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Vetter Sven Y., Raible Carsten, Aytac Sara, Grützner Paul Alfred, Frank Christian B. Bone Banking in a Traumatologic Department: A Ten-Year Analysis. Int J Biomed Mater Res. 2015;2(3):15-20. doi: 10.11648/j.ijbmr.20140203.11

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ijbmr.20140203.11,
  author = {Vetter Sven Y. and Raible Carsten and Aytac Sara and Grützner Paul Alfred and Frank Christian B},
  title = {Bone Banking in a Traumatologic Department: A Ten-Year Analysis},
  journal = {International Journal of Biomedical Materials Research},
  volume = {2},
  number = {3},
  pages = {15-20},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ijbmr.20140203.11},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijbmr.20140203.11},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijbmr.20140203.11},
  abstract = {Background: Orthopedic and traumatologic departments have the choice of conducting an own bone bank in which grafts are prepared and stored, or purchasing costly bone grafts from professional providers. The aim of the study was to retrospectively analyse the bone bank affiliated with the traumatology department in the ten-year time period from 2001-2010. Patients and Methods: Altogether 1035 patients who underwent a primary hip replacement were included as potential donors. 632 patients were treated with a coxarthritis (CA) and 403 with a femoral neck fracture (FNF). Results: The bone donation was deferred in 731 (70,6%) and conducted in 304 (29,4%) patients. The majority of the deferrals were due to the maturity (age above 75 years) of the patients and an osteoporotic bone structure of the graft. Other reasons for deferral were a positive donor history, incomplete donation documents, and previous osteosynthesis of the proximal femur or acetabulum. The rate for exclusion was significantly higher in the FNF group, which was based on the difference of age, bone structure quality, and the non-elective setting of the operative treatment. Conclusion: In summary, bone donations from urgently hospitalised patients with a FNF have a significantly higher deferral rate than electively planned patients with CA.},
 year = {2015}
}

Copy | Download