Comparative Efficacy of the Masquelet Versus Titanium Mesh Cage Techniques for the Treatment of Large Long Bone Defects

Background: Segmental long bone defects remain a formidable treatment challenge. All the existing standard treatment options have major limitations and often culminate in limb amputation or permanent functional deficits. We developed a novel, one-stage alternative treatment for segmental bone loss that utilizes the cylindrical titanium mesh cage (CTMC) in combination with bone graft, and have established its clinical merits in an initial clinical series. Shortly thereafter, Masquelet reported another new defect reconstruction technique that involves two-stage approach: first inducing biomembrane formation with a cement spacer, and subsequent spacer removal and bone grafting. Both the Masquelet and the CTMC techniques are based on the principle of graft containment to render optimal potential for graft to heal the defect; however, they differ in primary biological versus biomechanical functions provided by the containment. The Masquelet biomembrane containment, being a rich source of vascular supply and growth factors, creates an excellent biological milieu for graft, but requires an additional surgery and is associated with prolonged protected weight bearing until graft consolidation occurs. Conversely, the benefit of the CTMC technique is primarily the biomechanical support it provides for graft and the reconstructed extremity, thereby permitting immediate functional restoration without mobility or weight bearing restrictions during the bone healing process. Although both Masquelet and the CTMC techniques have been effective in the treatment of large segmental bone defects, there is no prospective, well-controlled study comparing their therapeutic efficacies for specific clinical indications.

Objective: Determining the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of the Masquelet (Arm I) versus the CTMC technique (Arm II) in combination with reamer-irrigator-aspirator (RIA) harvested autograft (Option A) or allograft-demineralized bone matrix (DBM) composite (Option II) in the treatment of segmental long bone deficiencies.

Specific Aims: 1) Establish the effects of the specific patient and bone defect characteristics on the treatment outcome; 2) Determine and compare clinical efficacies of the reconstruction techniques (Arm I vs Arm II); 3) Establish the merits of using specific graft type (Option A vs Option B) within and across each study arms; 3) Develop a quantitative predictive model to improve clinical decision making, and 4) Assess and compare the cost-effectiveness and resource expenditures incurred by the specific treatment selection.

Study Design: Single-center, multi-site, two-arm, randomized clinical trial. Thirty patients with segmental bone deficiency as a result of trauma, gunshot, iatrogenic resection due to infection, nonunion, or neoplasm will be enrolled and randomized to receive either the Masquelet (Arm I) or the CTMC as definitive defect treatment (Arm II). Bone graft selection will include either RIA-harvested autograft (Option A) or allograft croutons-DBM composite (Option B). Patients will be followed up to18 months. The data collected will include routine patient baseline information, systemic and extremity injury characteristics, bone defect characteristics, pre- and post-operative clinical examinations and imaging, validated functional outcomes measures, and associated cost expenditure. Descriptive statistics will be used to analyze and compare the results specifically related to the rate of defect healing and functional recovery. Paired t-test will be used to test the effects of the defect reconstruction option on the outcome measures. Analysis of covariance will be used for pair-wise comparison between the arms and within/across each bone graft option. Multiple models will be used to produce an accurate predictive model which accounts for possible morbidities and interactions. Derived from the joint distribution of costs and effects, cost-effectiveness acceptability curves will be established and compared for the study arms.

Military Relevance: Many combat injuries involve extremity trauma with segmental bone loss, and the extent to which they can be successfully treated impacts the function and quality of life of the wounded warrior. The Masquelet and the CTMC been developed as innovative, biologically-sound defect reconstructive techniques to address the complexity of therapeutic concerns associated with these conditions (ie, immediate restoration of limb alignment/stability, early motion, weight bearing). The proposed trial aims to compare the efficacy of these techniques to identify the one that can be instantly adopted and applied by military surgeons.