The purpose of this study was to compare the osteoconductivity, and absorbability of hydroxyapatite or beta-tricalcium phosphate in clinical scenario of opening wedge high tibial osteotomy Total 41 knees of 40 patients with follow up period of more than 1 year were enrolled. These patients were divided into two groups, Group I (22 knees, 21 patients) used hydroxyapatite and Group II (19 knees, 19 patients) used beta-tricalcium phosphate as a substitute in the opening gap. According to proven method, the osteoconductivity was assessed radiographically by the extent of new bone formation at osteotomy space and absorbability was evaluated by measuring the area occupied by substitute at immediate postoperative, postoperative 6 months and 1 year. Regarding preoperative demographic data, no significant differences were found between two groups. No statistically significant differences were found between two groups regarding lower limb alignment (mechanical femorotibial angle, weight-bearing line%) and posterior tibial slope at postoperative and final follow up radiographs. Concerning the osteoconductivity, there were no significant differences between two groups in any zone. However, the absorption rate was significantly greater in the Group II than in Group I at 6 months (Group I: 13.7 ± 6.8, group II: 35.3 ± 15.8, P = 0.001) and 1 year (Group I: 24.2 ± 6.3, Group II: 49.6 ± 14.3, P < 0.0001). The complications related to bone substitutes were not observed. Both hydroxyapatite and beta-tricalcium phosphate showed satisfactory gap healing without complications and can be successfully used as alternative healing materials in opening wedge high tibial osteotomy. Our study showed that beta-tricalcium phosphate has superior absorbability than hydroxyapatite. But osteoconductivity showed no significant difference.
High Tibial Osteotomy Bone Substitute Posterior Tibial Slope Open Wedge High Tibial Osteotomy Picture Archive Communication System
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.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
This paper was supported by Konkuk University.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
van Hemert WL, Willems K, Anderson PG, van Heerwaarden RJ, Wymenga AB. Tricalcium phosphate granules or rigid wedge preforms in opening wedge high tibial osteotomy: a radiological study with a new evaluation system. Knee. 2004;11(6):451–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Onodera J, Kondo E, Omizu N, Ueda D, Yagi T, Yasuda K. Beta-tricalcium phosphate shows superior absorption rate and osteoconductivity compared to hydroxyapatite in open-wedge high tibial osteotomy. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014;22(11):2763–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho SW, Kim DH, Lee GC, Lee SH, Park SH. Comparison between autogenous bone graft and allogenous cancellous bone graft in medial open wedge high tibial osteotomy with 2-year follow-up. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2013;25(3):117–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernigou P, Medevielle D, Debeyre J, Goutallier D. Proximal tibial osteotomy for osteoarthritis with varus deformity. A ten to thirteen-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1987;69(3):332–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brouwer RW, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, van Raaij TM, Verhaar JA. Osteotomy for medial compartment arthritis of the knee using a closing wedge or an wedge controlled by a Puddu plate. A one-year randomised, controlled study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88(11):1454–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coventry MB, Ilstrup DM, Wallrichs SL. Proximal tibial osteotomy. A critical long-term study of eighty-seven cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75(2):196–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright JM, Crockett HC, Slawski DP, Madsen MW, Windsor RE. High tibial osteotomy. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2005;13(4):279–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Floerkemeier S, Staubli AE, Schroeter S, Goldhahn S, Lobenhoffer P. Outcome after high tibial open-wedge osteotomy: a retrospective evaluation of 533 patients. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013;21(1):170–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amendola A, Fowler PJ, Litchfield R, Kirkley S, Clatworthy M. Wedge high tibial osteotomy using a novel technique: early results and complications. J Knee Surg. 2004;17(3):164–9.Google Scholar
Tunggal JA, Higgins GA, Waddell JP. Complications of closing wedge high tibial osteotomy. Int Orthop. 2010;34(2):255–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodner CM, Adams DJ, Diaz-Doran V, et al. Medial wedge tibial osteotomy and the sagittal plane: the effect of increasing tibial slope on tibiofemoral contact pressure. Am J Sports Med. 2006;34(9):1431–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lobenhoffer P, Agneskirchner JD. Improvements in surgical technique of valgus high tibial osteotomy. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2003;11(3):132–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valkering KP, van den Bekerom MP, Kappelhoff FM, Albers GH. Complications after tomofix medial wedge high tibial osteotomy. J Knee Surg. 2009;22(3):218–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller BS, Downie B, McDonough EB, Wojtys EM. Complications after medial wedge high tibial osteotomy. Arthroscopy. 2009;25(6):639–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brosset T, Pasquier G, Migaud H, Gougeon F. Wedge high tibial osteotomy performed without filling the defect but with locking plate fixation (TomoFix) and early weight-bearing: prospective evaluation of bone union, precision and maintenance of correction in 51 cases. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2011;97(7):705–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lash NJ, Feller JA, Batty LM, Wasiak J, Richmond AK. Bone grafts and bone substitutes for opening-wedge osteotomies of the knee: a systematic review. Arthroscopy. 2015;31(4):720–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernigou P, Ma W. Open wedge tibial osteotomy with acrylic bone cement as bone substitute. Knee. 2001;8(2):103–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tanaka T, Kumagae Y, Saito M, et al. Bone formation and resorption in patients after implantation of beta-tricalcium phosphate blocks with 60% and 75% porosity in opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2008;86(2):453–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koshino T, Murase T, Saito T. Medial opening-wedge high tibial osteotomy with use of porous hydroxyapatite to treat medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85-a(1):78–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miniaci A, Ballmer FT, Ballmer PM, Jakob RP. Proximal tibial osteotomy. A new fixation device. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989; Sep(246):250–9.Google Scholar
Uemura K, Kanamori A, Aoto K, Yamazaki M, Sakane M. Novel unidirectional porous hydroxyapatite used as a bone substitute for open wedge high tibial osteotomy. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2014;25(11):2541–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chazono M, Tanaka T, Kitasato S, Kikuchi T, Marumo K. Electron microscopic study on bone formation and bioresorption after implantation of beta-tricalcium phosphate in rabbit models. J Orthop Sci. 2008;13(6):550–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarcho M. Calcium phosphate ceramics as hard tissue prosthetics. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1981;157:259–78.Google Scholar
Wenisch S, Stahl JP, Horas U, et al. In vivo mechanisms of hydroxyapatite ceramicdegradation by osteoclasts: fine structural microscopy. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2003;67:713–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yamasaki N, Hirao M, Nanno K, et al. A comparative assessment of synthetic ceramic bone substitutes with different composition and microstructure in rabbit femoral condyle model. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2009;91:788–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar