A Comparison between Allograft and Autograft methods on the Rate of Union in Comminuted Fracture of Long Bones

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Bone grafting includes auto graft types which could and allograft be used for filling the bone defects and enhance the healing process in cases of traumatic and non-traumatic fracture. Because of Limitations of the auto graft method and increasing the morbidity, allograft type of graft are more considered. The purpose of this study was to compare the autograft and allograft methods. Materials and Methods: In this study, 100 patients with long bone fractures were divided into two groups (50 patients in each groups). They were matched for age, sex and type of fracture. In one group cancellous autograft was applied and the other group was treated with chips allograft. The amount and rate of union and complications were compared between the two groups. Results: Studied group, 100 patients, (37 ± 10 years, 55 male and 45 females). Union rate in the autograft group was 92% and in allograft group was 86%, there was no significant difference between the two groups. Union duration in autograft was 3.2 ± 0.5 months and in allograft group it was 3.4 ± 0.8 months. The time of the union between the two groups showed no significant difference. The most important complication of autograft group was nerve injury5 (10%) and hematom formation (14%) at the site of removal of the graft, in the allograft group, only a patient (2%) complicated with infection. Conclusion: In both methods, there is a high percentage of union and fracture healing. Duration of union is similar between the two types of grafts, but the morbidity in the autograft method was higher than allograft method.

Keywords: Autograft, Allograft, Fracture healing