Skip to main content

Table 4 Literature review of the outcome studies regarding MT and VBG

From: Comparison of the clinical outcomes between vascularized bone graft and the Masquelet technique for the reconstruction of Gustilo type III open tibial fractures

Study, year of publication

Type IIIB and C / all tibial fractures

Bone defect (cm) mean (range)

Acute reconstruction/after nonunion

Union time (months) mean (range)

Major adverse outcome

Post-operative deep infection

Masquelet technique

      

Kang et al. [20]

15/15

5.8

(4 – 11)

15/0

N/A

(4–7)

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

Sasaki et al. [28]

1/5

4.9

(2.5 – 6)

0/5

6 (4–9)

0 (0%)

1 (20%)

Zoller et al. [19]

3/8

6

(3 – 10)

4/4

13.5

(1.8–27)

4 (50%)

5 (62.5%)

Ma et al. [29]

6/15

0.97

(0 – 3.5)

0/15

7.5

(3–12)

0 (0%)

3 (20%)

Cho et al. [30]

8/11

7.52

(3.4–15.9)

0/11

9.1

(6–12)

2 (18.1%)

0 (%)

Giannoudis et al. [31]

2/11

4.49

(3.5 – 7.5)

4/7

5.7

(2–12)

1 (9%)

1 (9%)

Gupta et al. [32]

3/9

5.26

(3.3 – 8.5)

0/9

10.5

(8–13)

1 (11.1%)

2 (22.2%)

Vascularized bone graft

      

Bibbo et al. [24]

8/8

10.2

(8.9–12.6)

8/0

9 (7–14)

0 (0%)

0 (0%)

Cavadas et al. [22]

41/41

N/A

(4 – 17)

9/32

N/A

(5–9)

0 (0%)

2 (4.8%)

Zhen et al. [23]

28/28

15

(12 – 18)

28/0

8

(6.5–10.3)

0 (0%)

0 (%)

  1. MT: Masquelet technique, VBG: vascular bone graft