Operating Technique for Cartilage-Bone Grafting

  • Klaus Draenert
  • Yvette Draenert
  • Tim Pohlemann
  • Gerd Regel


For a long time, the Burkhardt’s saw-toothed cutter was the only biopsy instrument with which a nearly artifact-free bone cylinder could be gathered (Burkhardt 1956). The first experiments on cancellous bone healing were performed with the low-speed Burkhardt’s device. Tissue traumatization in the donor bed, however, was not acceptable for bone healing experiments. Diamond-coated instruments and the wet-grinding procedure had been developed specifically for experiments on the contact healing of cancellous bone (Draenert et al. 1981). Compared with the saw-toothed cutters, nearly no loss of tissue occurred (Fig. 6.1). The technology with respect to cartilage-bone grafts and biopsies (Draenert and Draenert 1987) was ready for application in the early 1980s and publication in 1987. During the evaluation, eight different cutter heads were tested in bovine ribs. As a result, the wet-grinding process using diamond-coated instruments turned out to be the only process to present a nearly atraumatic cylinder and bed, leaving bone and bone marrow of the graft and donor bed intact as well (Fig. 6.1). Those results were published later (Draenert et al. 2007).


Iliac Crest Hyaline Cartilage Diamond Tool Removal Tube Osteochondral Fragment 
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. Burkhardt R (1956) Die Myelotomie, eine neue Methode zur kombinierten cytologisch-histologischen Knochenmarksbiospie. Blut 2:267PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Draenert K, Draenert Y (1987) Ein neues Verfahren für die Knochenbiopsie und die Knorpel-Knochen-Transplantation. Sandorama III:5–12Google Scholar
  3. Draenert K, Draenert Y, Springorum HW et al (1981) Histo-Morphologie des Spongiosadefektes und die Heilung des autologen Spongiosatransplantates. In: Cotta H, Martini AK (Hrsg) (eds) Implantate und Transplantate in der Plastischen und Wiederherstellungschirurgie. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  4. Draenert FG, Mathys R Jr, Ehrenfeld M et al (2007) Histological examination of drill sites in bovine rib bone after in vitro with eight different devices. B J Oral Maxillofac Surg 45:548–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Draenert K, Draenert M, Erler M et al (2011) How bone forms in large cancellous defects: critical analysis based on experimental work and literature. Injury, Int J Care Injured 42:47–55Google Scholar
  6. Garde U (1995) Histomorphologie der primären Knoch­enheilung der Osteochondralfraktur. Die knöchernen Umbauvorgänge und restitutio ad integrum im Tierexperiement. Habilitationsschrift Universität, TrnavaGoogle Scholar
  7. Lange F (1924) Die Bolzung der Schenkelhalspseudarth­rose. Z Orthop Chir 45:492Google Scholar
  8. Lange M (1925) Entstehung und Behandlung einer Pseudarthrose in einer alten Femurfraktur. Muench med Wschr 72:855Google Scholar
  9. Lange (1962) Orthopädisch-Chirurgische Operationslehre. Zweite Auflage. S.90, 94, 428, 659 and 793. J.F. Bergmann, MünchenGoogle Scholar
  10. Lexer E (1908) Die Verwendung der freien Knochenplastik nebst Versuchen über Gelenkversteifung und Gelenktransplantation. Langenbecks Arch klin Chir 86:339Google Scholar
  11. Phemister DB (1948) Treatment of pseudarthrosis by simple bone graft without removal of callus. J Int Chir 8:713Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Klaus Draenert
    • 1
  • Yvette Draenert
    • 1
  • Tim Pohlemann
    • 2
  • Gerd Regel
    • 3
  1. 1.Zentrum fÜr Orthopädische WissenschaftenMÜnchenGermany
  2. 2.Klinik fÜr Unfall-, Hand- und WiederherstellungschirurgieUniversitätsklinikum des SaarlandesHomburgGermany
  3. 3.Klinikum Rosenheim UnfallchirurgieRosenheimGermany

Personalised recommendations