{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023937267849773007, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010730499380932727, 'mean_word_length': 5.06, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 1, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Allograft-Reconstructed Iliac Bone Graft Donor Site Remodels to Viable Bone and Its Feasibility for Revision Fusion.

BACKGROUND
Bone autograft options may be limited in revision spinal fusion cases. Reconstruction of the iliac bone graft (IBG) donor site with cancellous bone allograft allows for reharvest for patients who subsequently have another fusion. This study examined viability of the reconstructed IBG (RIBG) donor sites. Secondarily, we assessed the feasibility of whether the RIBG sites could be reharvested for obtaining a successful arthrodesis for a secondary fusion.


METHODS
Prospectively collected data of 154 consecutive lumbar revision fusions were reviewed, of which 17 cases had their IBG donor site backfilled with allograft bone at the time of their primary fusion and subsequently had secondary surgery for a pseudarthrosis repair or fusion extension. Biopsies of the RIBG and computed tomography (CT) images were obtained at the time of secondary fusion. Histology analyzed the ratio of filled to unfilled lacunae and marrow cellularity. Histology controls were from normal iliac crest. Clinically, postoperative CT and >2-year outcomes (visual analog scale [VAS] and Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]) evaluated the feasibility of the secondary fusion surgery using RIBG. The RIBG fusion rate and outcomes were compared with clinical control revision groups that had IBG and/or bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) used for their revision fusion.


RESULTS
CT images prior to RIBG harvest found bony healing of the original graft donor site in all except 1 case. RIBG bone marrow histology found lower cellularity vs controls, but this characteristic did not appear to compromise bone viability with filled lacunae in 83% ± 14% in the RIBG group, vs 88% ± 8% for iliac controls. After revision fusion, often combined with bone growth stimulator or BMP, repeat CT demonstrated solid spinal fusions in 16 of 17 patients, whereas control revision group fusion rates were approximately 80%. Clinical improvement was significant (VAS decrease = 3.8, ODI decrease = 16.5) and comparable with the IBG revision controls.


CONCLUSION
RIBG using allograft remodels into viable predominately cancellous bone and is clinically feasible for revision fusion if IBG or BMP is unavailable.


CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Reconstructed iliac bone graft is viable and may be used as a bone graft option.


LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3