Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2008 Jun;17(6):845-52.
doi: 10.1007/s00586-008-0648-3. Epub 2008 Apr 4.

Donor site morbidity following iliac crest bone harvesting for cervical fusion: a comparison between minimally invasive and open techniques

Raymond Pollock  1 , Ilhan Alcelik, Chandra Bhatia, Graham Chuter, Kiran Lingutla, Chakravarty Budithi, Manoj Krishna
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Donor site morbidity following iliac crest bone harvesting for cervical fusion: a comparison between minimally invasive and open techniques

Raymond Pollock et al. Eur Spine J. 2008 Jun.

Abstract

We have studied the occurrence of donor site morbidity, cosmesis and overall satisfaction with graft procedure in 76 patients who had undergone iliac crest bone harvesting for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Totally 24 patients underwent an open procedure and 52 a minimally invasive trephine harvesting method. Although our study demonstrated substantial donor site pain and its effect on ambulation in both groups, this was of limited duration. Two patients, one in each group, suffered long-term pain that was eventually resolved. Totally 8.3% of patients in the open group suffered minor complications and 11.5% in the trephine group. There were two cases of meralgia parasthetica. There were no major complications in either group. There was no statistically significant difference in morbidity between the open and trephine groups. There was a trend towards significance (P = 0.076) for pain at the donor site, with less pain reported by patients who underwent the trephine procedure for harvesting.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The bone graft questionniare used in the study
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Duration of post-operative pain at the donor site as percent of those who suffered pain
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Intensity of post-operative pain at the donor site
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Ahlmann A, Patzakis M, Roidis N, et al. Comparison of anterior and posterior iliac crest bone grafts in terms of harvest-site morbidity and functional outcomes. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84-A:716–720. - PubMed
    1. Arington ED, Smith WJ, Chambers HG, et al. Complications of iliac crest bone graft harvesting. Clin Orthop. 1996;329:300–309. doi: 10.1097/00003086-199608000-00037. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Billmire DA, Rotatori S. Use of the CORB needle biopsy for the harvesting of iliac crest bone graft. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1994;93:416–418. doi: 10.1097/00006534-199402000-00033. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Boustred AM, Fernandes D, Zyl AE. Minimally invasive iliac cancellous bone graft harvesting. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1997;99:1760–1764. doi: 10.1097/00006534-199705000-00048. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Burstein FD, Simms C, Cohen SR, et al. Iliac crest bone graft harvesting techniques: a comparison. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;105:34–39. doi: 10.1097/00006534-200001000-00006. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms