XXXX after spinal fusion for @entity1635 . A comparison of autogeneic and allogeneic bone grafts.

@entity1 @entity1615 @entity190 @entity1635 @entity1516
This study was undertaken to compare the incidence of @entity1516 in fusions supplemented with autogeneic and frozen allogeneic grafts. The records of 208 @entity1 with @entity1615 who were treated by posterior fusion and Harrington instrumentation were studied. The fusion was supplemented by an autogeneic iliac bone graft in 114 @entity1 and by an allogeneic bank bone graft in 94 @entity1 . The fusion mass was explored in all @entity1 with suspected @entity1516 ; therefore, all @entity1516 reported in this series were proved by surgical exploration. @entity1516 developed in five @entity1 (4.4%) receiving an autogeneic graft and in five @entity1 (5.3%) receiving an allogeneic graft. The incidence of @entity1516 was not significantly different at the 95% level of certainty. Average @entity190 and operative time were determined for all @entity1 . The decreases in average @entity190 and operative time in those @entity1 receiving allogeneic grafts were significant (p less than .01). Thus, based on the incidence of @entity1516 , allogeneic frozen bank-stored bone is an attractive alternative to autogeneic iliac bone for fusion supplementation in the treatment of @entity1635 . Total operative time and @entity190 can be decreased, and possible complications associated with a donor site can be avoided.
