Bone defect treatment: does the type and properties of the spacer affect the induction of Masquelet membrane? Evidence today

Abstract

Abstract Purpose High clinical success rates have been reported with the Masquelet technique in the treatment of traumatic bone loss. An increasing number of studies suggest that various factors can influence the properties of induced membranes. Goal of this systematic review is to answer the following questions: (1) which are the ideal spacer properties (material, surface topography, antibiotic supplementation) to booster the quality and osteogenic potential of induced membranes? (2) what is the ideal time to perform the second-stage operation? Methods A systematic search using the keywords “((Masquelet) OR (Induced Periosteum)) AND ((Spacer) OR (Time))” was performed in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies published up to the 23rd of February 2022 were included and assessed independently by two reviewers. Results Thirteen animal and 1 clinical studies were identified to address the above questions. Spacer materials used were PMMA, silicone, titanium, polypropylene, PVA, PCL and calcium sulfate. With the exception of PVA sponges, all solid materials could induce membranes. Low union rates have been reported with titanium and rough surfaced spacers. Scraping of the inner surface of the IM also increased bony union rates. In terms of the ideal timing to perform the second-stage evidence suggests that membranes older than 8 weeks continue to have regenerative capacities similar to younger ones. Conclusion Membranes induced by smooth PMMA spacers loaded with low concentrations of antibiotics showed powerful osteogenic properties. Other materials such as Polypropylene or Calcium sulfate can also be used with good results. Despite current recommendation to perform the second stage operation in 4–8 weeks, membranes older than 8 weeks seem to have similar regenerative capacities to younger ones.