Reliability of Bone Scintigraphy to Assess the Survival of Free Bone Transfers: Limitations of the Method

  • F. Schuind
  • M. Noorbergen
  • A. Louvard
  • A. Schoutens
  • D. Goldschmidt
Conference paper


Advances of microsurgery over the past 15 years have made it possible, in selected indications, to provide continuing blood flow circulation to bone autografts. These techniques have been developed in an attempt to avoid the problems of revascularization of conventional bone autografts (necrosis of large cortical autografts, with secondary weakening when creeping substitution occurs). The vascularized bone grafts have the advantages of the non-vascularized ones, as well as the advantages of preserved viability [1–3, 7–10]. Strong living cortical bone is transplanted; the graft does not become weaker as no creeping substitution occurs. Both the graft and the recipient bone contribute to callus formation: the problem is essentially reduced to one of double fracture healing, rather than of graft incorporation. Graft hypertrophy in response to mechanical stimulations is observed. Vascularized bone grafts, being independent of the surrounding vascularity of the recipient bed, appear also to tolerate irradiation or resist infection.


Bone Graft Bone Scintigraphy Bone Auto Graft Vascularized Bone Graft Recipient Bone 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Berggren A, Weiland AJ, Dorfman H (1982) Free vascularized bone grafts: factors affecting their survival and ability to heal to recipient bone defects. Plast Reconstr Surg 69:19–29PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berggren A, Weiland AJ, Dorfman H (1982) The effect of prolonged ischemia time on osteocyte and osteoblast survival in composite bone grafts revascularized by microvascular anastomoses. Plast Reconstr Surg 69:290–298PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berggren A, Weiland AJ, Oestrup LT (1982) Bone scintigraphy in evaluating the viability of composite bone grafts revascularized by microvascular anastomoses, conventional autogenous bone grafts, and free non-revascularized periosteal grafts. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 64-A:799–809Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bos KE (1979) Bone scintigraphy of experimental composite bone grafts revascularized by microvascular anastomoses. Plast Reconstr Surg 64:353–360PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Clouet M, Chavoin JP, Vigoni F, Pessey JJ, Costagliola M (1981) Intérêt et limites de la scintigraphic au méthylène disphosphonate pyrophosphate marqué au technétium 99 m dans le contrôle des transplants osseux revascularisés. Ann Chir Plast 26:217–220PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kirchner PT, Simon MA (1981) Current concepts review. Radioisotopic evaluation of skeletal disease. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 63-A:673–681Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schuind F, Burny F, Lejeune F (1987) Apports de la microchirurgie en Orthopédie et en Traumatologie. Rev Méd Brux 8:117–124PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schuind F, Burny F, Lejeune F (1988) Microsurgical free fibular bone transfer: a technique for reconstruction of large skeletal defects following resection of high-grade malignant tumors. World J Surg 12:310–317PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Taylor GI (1983) The current status of free vascularized bone grafts. Clin Plast Surg 10:185–209PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Weiland AJ (1981) Current concepts review. Vascularized free bone transplants. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 63-A:166–169Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. Schuind
  • M. Noorbergen
  • A. Louvard
  • A. Schoutens
  • D. Goldschmidt

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations