PDF herunterladen
Osteosynthesis and Trauma Care 2002; 10(1): 1-7
DOI: 10.1055/s-2002-30627
Original Articles

© Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart · New York

Current Concepts of Fracture Healing, Delayed Unions, and Nonunions

F. C. den Boer, P. Patka, F. C. Bakker, H. J. Th. M. Haarman
  • Department of Surgery/Traumatology, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
17. Mai 2002 (online)

    Lizenzen und Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Im Gegensatz zu vielen anderen Geweben und Organen im Körper hat das Skelett eine auffallende Potenz zur Regeneration. Die Heilung einer Knochenfraktur umfasst eine komplizierte Cascade von Vorgängen auf zellulärem und biochemischen Niveau, welche in einer kompletten strukturellen und funktionellen Wiederherstellung des betreffenden Knochens endet. Gestörte Heilung tritt in 5 bis 10 % aller Frakturen auf, was erkennbar ist als ein delayed union oder ein nonunion. Nonunions können klassifiziert werden als hypertroph oder atroph, jedes mit spezifischen ursächlichen Faktoren. Diese Faktoren sind wichtig, weil die ursächlichen Mechanismen die notwendige Behandlung diktieren. Behandlungsmethoden, die die Frakturheilung stimulieren, können angewendet werden bei delayed unions und nonunions. Zusätzlich können diese Methoden verwendet werden bei der Behandlung von frischen Frakturen mit dem Ziel, die Heilungszeit zu verkürzen und gestörte Heilung zu verhindern. Behandlungen, die die Knochenheilung stimulieren, können eingeteilt werden in biologische, mechanische und biophysische Methoden.
In diesem Artikel werden der Frakturheilungsprozess, die ursächlichen Mechanismen der gestörten Knochenheilung und Behandlung mit dem Ziel, die Frakturheilung zu stimulieren, beschrieben. Die präsentierten Daten basieren auf der heutigen Literatur, und die neuesten Entwicklungen im Bereich von stimulierter Knochenheilung sind berücksichtigt.

Abstract

In contrast to many other tissues and organs in the body, the skeleton has a striking potential for regeneration. The healing of a bone fracture involves a complicated cascade of events on a cellular and biochemical level, that ends in a complete structural and functional restoration of the involved bone. Impaired healing occurs in 5 to 10 % of all fractures, which becomes evident as a delayed union or a nonunion. Nonunions can be classified as hypertrophic or atrophic, each with specific causative factors. These factors are important, because the mechanisms underlying impaired fracture healing dictate the necessary treatment. Treatment methods, that enhance fracture healing, can be applicated in delayed unions and nonunions. Furthermore, these methods can be used in the treatment of fresh fractures in order to shorten the healing time and to prevent impaired healing. Treatments that promote bone healing can be divided into biological, mechanical, and biophysical methods.
In this paper, the fracture healing process, mechanisms underlying impaired bone healing, and treatments aimed at enhancement of fracture healing are described. The presented data are based on the current literature and include the newest developments in the field of enhanced bone repair.

Schlüsselwörter

Frakturheilung - Verzögerte Knochenbruchheilung - Pseudoarthrose - Gesteigerte Knochenbruchheilung

Key words

Fracture healing - Delayed union - Nonunion - Enhanced bone repair

References

  • 1 Andrew J G, Andrew S M, Freemont A J, Marsh D R. Inflammatory cells in normal human fracture healing.  Acta Orthop Scand. 1994;  65 462-466
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 Barnes G L, Kostenuik P J, Gerstenfeld L C, Einhorn T A. Growth factor regulation of fracture repair.  J Bone Miner Res. 1999;  14 1805-1815
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 3 Bauer T W, Muschler G F. Bone graft materials. An overview of the basic science.  Clin Orthop. 2000;  371 10-27
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 4 Boden S D. Bioactive factors for bone tissue engineering.  Clin Orthop. 1999;  367S S84-S94
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 Brager M A, Patterson M J, Connolly J F, Nevo Z. Osteogenic growth peptide normally stimulated by blood loss and marrow ablation has local and systemic effects on fracture healing in rats.  J Orthop Res. 2000;  18 133-139
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 Bruder S P, Fox B S. Tissue engineering of bone. Cell based strategies.  Clin Orthop. 1999;  367S S68-S83
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 7 Bucholz R W, Carlton A, Holmes R. Interporous hydroxyapatite as a bone graft substitute in tibial plateau fractures.  Clin Orthop. 1989;  240 53-62
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Buckwalter J A, Glimcher M J, Cooper R R, Recker R. Bone biology. Part II: Formation, form, modeling, remodeling, and regulation of cell function.  J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 1995;  77 1276-1289
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 9 Chapman M W, Buchholz R, Cornell C. Treatment of acute fractures with a collagen-calcium phosphate graft material.  J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 1997;  79 495-502
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Claes L, Heitemeyer U, Krischak G, Braun H, Hierholzer G. Fixation technique influences osteogenesis of comminuted fractures.  Clin Orthop. 1999;  365 221-229
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 11 Connolly J F, Guse R, Tiedeman J, Dehne R. Autologous marrow injection as a substitute for operative grafting of tibial nonunions.  Clin Orthop. 1991;  266 259-270
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 12 Einhorn T A. Current concepts review. Enhancement of fracture-healing.  J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 1995;  77 940-956
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 13 Frankenburg E P, Goldstein S A, Bauer T W, Harris S A, Poser R D. Biomechanical and histological evaluation of a calcium phosphate cement.  J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 1998;  80 1112-1124
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 14 Frost H M. The biology of fracture healing. An overview for clinicians. Part I.  Clin Orthop. 1989;  248 283-293
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 15 Frost H M. The biology of fracture healing. An overview for clinicians. Part II.  Clin Orthop. 1989;  248 294-309
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 16 Goodship A E, Kenwright J. The influence of induced micromovement upon the healing of experimental tibial fractures.  J Bone Joint Surg [Br]. 1985;  67 650-655
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 17 Grundnes O, Reikerås O. Effects of instability on bone healing. Femoral osteotomies studied in rats.  Acta Orthop Scand. 1993;  64 55-58
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 18 Hak D J, Lee S S, Goulet J A. Success of exchange reamed intramedullary nailing for femoral shaft nonunion or delayed union.  J Orthop Trauma. 2000;  14 178-182
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 19 Heckman J D, Ryaby J P, McCabe J, Frey J J, Kilcoyne R F. Acceleration of tibial fracture-healing by non-invasive, low-intensity pulsed ultrasound.  J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 1994;  76 26-34
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 20 Henricson A, Hulth A, Johnell O. The cartilaginous fracture callus in rats.  Acta Orthop Scand. 1987;  58 244-248
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 21 Holzer G, Majeska R J, Lundy M W, Hartke J R, Einhorn T A. Parathyroid hormone enhances fracture healing. A Preliminary report.  Clin Orthop. 1999;  366 258-263
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 22 Hulth A. Current concepts of fracture healing.  Clin Orthop. 1989;  249 265-284
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 23 Kenwright J, Richardson J B, Cunningham J L. et al . Axial movement and tibial fractures. A controlled randomised trial of treatment.  J Bone Joint Surg [Br]. 1991;  73 654-659
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 24 Kleinschmidt J C, Hollinger J O. Animal models in bone research. In: Habal MB, Reddi AH (eds). Bone Grafts & Bone Substitutes. W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia, London, Toronto, Montreal, Sydney, Tokyo 1992; 133 - 146
  • 25 Lane J M, Tomin E, Bostrom M PG. Biosynthetic bone grafting.  Clin Orthop. 1999;  367 107-117
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 26 Lane J M, Yasko A W, Tomin E. et al . Bone marrow and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 in osseous repair.  Clin Orthop. 1999;  361 216-227
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 27 Marsh D. Concepts of fracture union, delayed union, and nonunion.  Clin Orthop. 1998;  355S S22-S30
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 28 McKibbin B. The biology of fracture healing in long bones.  J Bone Joint Surg [Br]. 1978;  60 150-162
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 29 Postacchini F, Gumina S, Perugia D, De Martino C. Early fracture callus in the diaphysis of human long bones. Histologic and ultrastructural study.  Clin Orthop. 1995;  310 218-228
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 30 Probst A, Spiegel H-U. Cellular mechanisms of bone repair.  J Invest Surg. 1997;  10 77-86
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 31 Rosenthal R K, Folkman J, Glowacki J. Demineralized bone implants for nonunion fractures, bone cysts, and fibrous lesions.  Clin Orthop. 1999;  364 61-69
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 32 Runkel M, Rommens P M. Pseudarthrosen.  Unfallchirurg. 2000;  103 51-63
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 33 Rüter A, Mayr E. Pseudarthrosen.  Chirurg. 1999;  70 1239-1245
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 34 Sakai R, Miwa K, Eto Y. Local administration of activin promotes fracture healing in the rat fibula fracture model.  Bone. 1999;  25 191-196
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 35 Scammell B E, Roach H I. A new role for the chondrocyte in fracture repair: endochondral ossification includes direct bone formation by former chondrocytes.  J Bone Miner Res. 1996;  11 737-745
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 36 Schmitz M A, Finnegan M, Natarajan R, Champine J. Effect of smoking on tibial shaft fracture healing.  Clin Orthop. 1999;  365 184-200
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 37 Schweiberer L, Baumgart R, Deiler S t. Die biologischen Bedingungen atropher und hypertropher Pseudarthrosen der Schaftknochen. Ursachen und Erscheinungsbild.  Chirurg. 1999;  70 1193-1201
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 38 Scott G, King J B. A prospective, double-blind trial of electrical capacitive coupling in the treatment of non-union of long bones.  J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 1994;  76 820-826
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 39 Sharrard W JW. A double-blind trial of pulsed electromagnetic fields for delayed union of tibial fractures.  J Bone Joint Surg [Br]. 1990;  72 347-355
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 40 Wu C C, Shih C H, Chen W J, Tai C L. Effect of reaming bone grafting on treating femoral shaft aseptic nonunion after plating.  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1999;  119 303-307
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 41 Younger E M, Chapman M W. Morbidity at bone graft donor sites.  J Orthop Trauma. 1989;  3 192-195
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar

Dr. Frank C. den Boer

Department of Surgery

VU University Medical Centre

P.O. Box 70 57

1007 MB Amsterdam

The Netherlands

Telefon: +31-20-44 402 68

Fax: +31-20-44 402 74

eMail: frankdenboer@hotmail.com