Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 536
Filtrar
2.
J Clin Med ; 13(16)2024 Aug 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39200923

RESUMO

Introduction: Vertebral compression fractures (VCFs) pose a considerable healthcare burden and are linked to elevated morbidity and mortality. Despite available anti-osteoporotic treatments (AOTs), guideline adherence is lacking. This study aims to evaluate subsequent hip fracture incidence after index VCF and to elucidate AOT prescribing patterns in VCF patients, further assessing the impact of surgical interventions on these patterns. Materials and Methods: Patients with index VCFs between 2010 and 2021 were identified using the PearlDiver database. Diagnostic and procedural data were recorded using International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9, ICD-10) and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Patients under age 50 and follow-up

3.
Global Spine J ; 14(6): 1689, 2024 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38973099
4.
World Neurosurg ; 190: e435-e442, 2024 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39067691

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The present study compares postoperative outcomes between patients with and without sickle cell disease (SCD) undergoing 1-to 3-level lumbar spinal fusion for degenerative pathologies. METHODS: Patients who underwent 1-to 3-level lumbar spinal fusion for degenerative pathologies from 2010 to 2021 were identified using the PearlDiver database. Patients were separated into 1) SCD and 2) non-SCD groups and were propensity-matched 1:1 for age, sex, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, surgical approach, and various comorbidities. Complications were separately analyzed by single- and multilevel procedures using chi-squared and Mann-Whitney U testing. RESULTS: Propensity-score matching identified 1934 SCD and non-SCD patients who underwent single-level fusion and 2094 SCD and non-SCD patients who underwent multilevel fusion. Across single-level fusions, those with SCD had a significantly higher risk of neurovascular compromise (P < 0.001), venous thromboembolism (P = 0.004), pneumonia (P = 0.032), urinary tract infections (P = 0.001), and greater postoperative opioid usage out to 12 months (P = 0.018). Across multilevel fusions, SCD carried higher risk for neurovascular compromise (P < 0.001), pneumonia (P = 0.010), and urinary tract infections (P < 0.001). All SCD patients had significantly higher opioid use at 1 month (P = 0.001) and at 6 months (P = 0.009) postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with SCD undergoing lumbar spinal fusion demonstrate higher risks for coagulopathic, ischemic, and infectious-related complications, as well as long-term postoperative opioid use. Awareness of the unique complication profile in SCD patients may help guide surgeons in refining perioperative management strategies to optimize outcomes in patients with SCD.


Assuntos
Anemia Falciforme , Vértebras Lombares , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Pontuação de Propensão , Fusão Vertebral , Humanos , Fusão Vertebral/métodos , Fusão Vertebral/efeitos adversos , Anemia Falciforme/complicações , Anemia Falciforme/cirurgia , Feminino , Masculino , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Vértebras Lombares/cirurgia , Adulto , Idoso , Estudos Retrospectivos
5.
J Bone Metab ; 31(2): 114-131, 2024 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38886969

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There is considerable heterogeneity in findings and a lack of consensus regarding the interplay between osteoporosis and outcomes in patients with lumbar degenerative spine disease. Therefore, the purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to gather and analyze existing data on the effect of osteoporosis on radiographic, surgical, and clinical outcomes following surgery for lumbar degenerative spinal disease. METHODS: A systematic review was performed to determine the effect of osteoporosis on the incidence of adverse outcomes after surgical intervention for lumbar degenerative spinal diseases. The approach focused on the radiographic outcomes, reoperation rates, and other medical and surgical complications. Subsequently, a meta-analysis was performed on the eligible studies. RESULTS: The results of the meta-analysis suggested that osteoporotic patients experienced increased rates of adjacent segment disease (ASD; p=0.015) and cage subsidence (p=0.001) while demonstrating lower reoperation rates than non-osteoporotic patients (7.4% vs. 13.1%; p=0.038). The systematic review also indicated that the length of stay, overall costs, rates of screw loosening, and rates of wound and other medical complications may increase in patients with a lower bone mineral density. Fusion rates, as well as patient-reported and clinical outcomes, did not differ significantly between osteoporotic and non-osteoporotic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Osteoporosis was associated with an increased risk of ASD, cage migration, and possibly postoperative screw loosening, as well as longer hospital stays, incurring higher costs and an increased likelihood of postoperative complications. However, a link was not established between osteoporosis and poor clinical outcomes.

6.
Global Spine J ; 14(4_suppl): 3S, 2024 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38726629
7.
Clin Neurol Neurosurg ; 242: 108350, 2024 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38788543

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocols were developed to counteract the adverse effects of the surgical stress response, aiming for quicker postoperative recovery. Initially applied in abdominal surgeries, ERAS principles have extended to orthopedic spine surgery, but research in this area is still in its infancy. The current study investigated the impact of ERAS on postoperative pain and opioid consumption in elective spine surgeries. METHODS: A single-center retrospective study of patients undergoing elective spine surgery from May 2019 to July 2020. Patients were categorized into two groups: those enrolled in the ERAS pathway and those adhering to traditional surgical protocols. Data on demographics, comorbidities, length of stay (LOS), surgical procedures, and postoperative outcomes were collected. Postoperative pain was evaluated using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), while opioid utilization was quantified in morphine milligram equivalents (MME). NRS and MME were averaged for each patient across all days under observation. Differences in outcomes between groups (ERAS vs. treatment as usual) were tested using the Wilcoxon rank sum test for continuous variables and Pearson's or Fisher's exact tests for categorical variables. RESULTS: The median of patient's mean daily NRS scores for postoperative pain were not statistically significantly different between groups (median = 5.55 (ERAS) and 5.28 (non-ERAS), p=.2). Additionally, the median of patients' mean daily levels of MME were similar between groups (median = 17.24 (ERAS) and 16.44 (non-ERAS), p=.3) ERAS patients experienced notably shorter LOS (median=2 days) than their non-ERAS counterparts (median=3 days, p=.001). The effect of ERAS was moderated by whether the patient had ACDF surgery. ERAS (vs. non-ERAS) patients who had ACDF surgery had 1.64 lower average NRS (p=.006). ERAS (vs. non-ERAS) patients who had a different surgery had 0.72 higher average NRS (p=.02) but had almost half the length of stay, on average (p<.001). CONCLUSIONS: The current study underscores the dynamic nature of ERAS protocols within the realm of spine surgery. While ERAS demonstrates advantages such as reduced LOS and improved patient-reported outcomes, it requires careful implementation and customization to address the specific demands of each surgical discipline. The potential to expedite recovery, optimize resource utilization, and enhance patient satisfaction cannot be overstated. However, the fine balance between achieving these benefits and ensuring comprehensive patient care, especially in the context of postoperative pain management, must be maintained. As ERAS continues to evolve and find its place in diverse surgical domains, it is crucial for healthcare providers to remain attentive to patient needs, adapting ERAS protocols to suit individual patient populations and surgical contexts.


Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos , Recuperação Pós-Cirúrgica Melhorada , Dor Pós-Operatória , Humanos , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Masculino , Feminino , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Idoso , Adulto , Coluna Vertebral/cirurgia , Tempo de Internação/estatística & dados numéricos , Medição da Dor
8.
Global Spine J ; 14(4): 1107-1109, 2024 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38698569
9.
Global Spine J ; 14(3): 775, 2024 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38588718
10.
Global Spine J ; 14(8): 2420-2439, 2024 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38666610

RESUMO

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic Review. OBJECTIVES: While substantial research has explored the impact of osteoporosis on patients undergoing adult spinal deformity (ASD) correction, the literature remains inconclusive. As such, the purpose of this study is to synthesize and analyze existing studies pertaining to osteoporosis as a predictor of postoperative outcomes in ASD surgery. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effect that a diagnosis of osteoporosis, based on ICD-10 coding, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) or computed tomography, has on the incidence of adverse outcomes following surgical correction of ASD. Statistical analysis was performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (Version 2) using a random effects model to account for heterogeneity between studies. RESULTS: After application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, 36 and 28 articles were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, respectively. The meta-analysis identified greater rates of screw loosening amongst osteoporotic patients (70.5% vs 31.9%, P = .009), and decreased bone mineral density in patients who developed proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) (.69 vs .79 g/cm2, P = .001). The systematic review demonstrated significantly increased risk of any complication, reoperation, and proximal junctional failure (PJF) associated with reduced bone density. No statistical difference was observed between groups regarding fusion rates, readmission rates, and patient-reported and/or functional outcome scores. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates a higher incidence of screw loosening, PJK, and revision surgery amongst osteoporotic ASD patients. Future investigations should explore outcomes at various follow-up intervals in order to better characterize how risk changes with time and to tailor preoperative planning based on patient-specific characteristics.

11.
Global Spine J ; 14(7): 2183-2200, 2024 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38469858

RESUMO

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVES: To assess the radiographic risk factors for adjacent segment disease (ASD) following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for degenerative cervical spine pathologies. METHODS: PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library databases were searched up to December 2023. The primary inclusion criteria were degenerative spinal conditions treated with ACDF, comparing radiological parameters in patients with and without postoperative ASD. The radiographic parameters included intervertebral disc height, cervical sagittal alignment, sagittal segmental alignment, range of motion, segmental height, T1 slope, sagittal vertical axis (SVA), thoracic inlet angle (TIA), and plate to disc distance (PPD). Risk of bias was assessed for all studies. The Cochrane Review Manager was utilized to perform the meta-analysis. RESULTS: From 7044 articles, 13 retrospective studies were included in the final analysis. Three studies had "not serious" bias and the other 10 studies had serious or very serious bias. The total number of patients in the included studies was 1799 patients. Five studies included single-level ACDF, 2 studies included multi-level ACDF, and 6 studies included single or multi-level ACDF. On meta-analysis, the significant risk factors associated with ASD development were reduced postoperative cervical lordosis (mean difference [MD] = 3.35°, P = .002), reduced last-follow-up cervical lordosis (MD = -3.02°, P = .0003), increased preoperative to postoperative cervical sagittal alignment change (MD = -3.68°, P = .03), and the presence of developmental cervical canal stenosis (Odds ratio [OR] = 4.17, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Decreased postoperative cervical lordosis, greater change in cervical sagittal alignment and developmental cervical canal stenosis were associated with an increased risk of ASD following ACDF.

12.
Global Spine J ; 14(5): 1463, 2024 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38533920
13.
Int J Spine Surg ; 2024 Feb 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38413235

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: This review outlines clinical data and characteristics of current Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved implants in cervical disc replacement/cervical disc arthroplasty (CDR/CDA) to provide a centralized resource for spine surgeons. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on CDR/CDA were identified using a search of the PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases. The initial search identified 69 studies. Duplicates were removed, and the following inclusion criteria were applied when determining eligibility of RCTs for the current review: (1) discussing CDR/CDA prosthesis and (2) published within between 2010 and 2020. Studies without clinical data or that were not RCTs were excluded. All articles were reviewed independently by 2 authors, with the involvement of an arbitrator to facilitate consensus on any discrepancies. RESULTS: A total of 34 studies were included in the final review. Findings were synthesized into a comprehensive table describing key features and clinical results for each FDA-approved CDR/CDA implant and are overall suggestive of expanding indications and increasing utilization. CONCLUSIONS: RCTs have provided substantial evidence to support CDR/CDA for treating single- and 2-level cervical degenerative disc disease in place of conventional anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This review provides a resource that consolidates relevant clinical data for current FDA-approved implants to help spine surgeons make an informed decision during preoperative planning.

14.
Global Spine J ; 14(2_suppl): 86S-93S, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38421321

RESUMO

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to analyze the complications related to multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) using osteobiologics other than bone morphogenetic protein (BMP). METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases. The search to identify studies reporting complications in multilevel ACDF surgery using osteobiologics other than bone morphogenetic protein was performed in August 2020. The study was reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA). RESULTS: A total of 584 articles were found after searching the databases and removing duplicates. Next, screening was performed in a double reviewer process, and 153 eligible articles-with 4 retrospective studies-in full-text were selected; these met all inclusion criteria. A total of 197 patients received 3-level ACDF, while 72 patients received 4-level ACDF. Osteobiologics were used in all selected articles, allograft was used in 4 studies, autologous bone graft was utilized in 3 articles, and hydroxyapatite was used in 1 article. The main complications reported were dysphagia, adjacent segment disease, and pseudarthrosis. CONCLUSIONS: Given the limited evidence, no conclusions on complications in multilevel ACDF using osteobiologics other than BMP could be made. However, descriptively, the most common complications found were dysphagia, adjacent segment disease, and pseudoarthrosis. Further prospective studies separately analyzing complications in multilevel ACDF by osteobiologics and a number of treated levels are needed.

15.
Global Spine J ; 14(2_suppl): 70S-77S, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38421325

RESUMO

Study Design: Systematic literature reviewObjective: To critically analyze the literature and describe the complications associated with the use of allograft in 1- or 2- level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF)Methods: A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases was conducted for literature published between January 2000 and August 2020 reporting complications associated with the use of allograft in 1- or 2- level ACDF.Results: From 584 potentially relevant citations, 21 met the inclusion criteria (4 randomized controlled trials (RCT), 4 prospective, and 13 retrospective studies). The patient number varied between 26 and 463 in comparative studies (RCT and non-RCT) and between 29 and 345 in non-comparative studies. Fusion rate was reported in 14 studies and ranged between 68.5-100%. The most frequently reported complication was post-operative dysphagia or dysphonia, with incidences ranging between .5% and 14.4%. Revision surgery was the second most reported complication (14 studies) and ranged between 0% and 10.3%. Wound-related complications were reported in 6 studies and ranged between 0% and 22.8%.Conclusion: The overall reporting of complications was low with very few comparative studies. Reported complications with allografts are within the range of other osteobiologics and autografts and in most cases may not attributable to the use of osteobiologics and may be complications of the procedure itself. Comparative studies with a more robust methodology analyzing complications with allograft and other osteobiologics are needed to inform current practice with strong recommendations.

16.
Global Spine J ; 14(2_suppl): 14S-23S, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38421327

RESUMO

STUDY DESIGN: Methodological study for guideline development. OBJECTIVE: AO Spine Guideline for Using Osteobiologics (AO-GO) project for spine degenerative pathologies was an international, multidisciplinary collaborative initiative to identify and evaluate evidence on existing use of osteobiologics in Anterior Cervical Fusion and Decompression (ACDF). The aim was to formulate precisely defined, clinically relevant and internationally applicable guidelines ensuring evidence-based, safe and effective use of osteobiologics, considering regional preferences and cost-effectiveness. METHODS: Guideline was completed in two phases: Phase 1- evidence synthesis; Phase 2- recommendation development based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. In Phase 1, key questions identified by a panel of experts were addressed in a series of systematic reviews of randomized and non-randomized studies. In Phase 2, the GRADE approach was used to formulate a series of recommendations, including expert panel discussions via web calls and face-to-face meetings. DISCUSSION: AO-GO aims to bridge an important gap between evidence and use of osteobiologics in spine fusion surgeries. Owing to differences in osteobiologics preparation and functional characteristics, regulatory requirements for approval may vary, therefore it is highly likely that these products enter market without quality clinical trials. With a holistic approach the guideline aims to facilitate evidence-based, patient-oriented decision-making processes in clinical practice, thus stimulating further evidence-based studies regarding osteobiologics usage in spine surgeries. In Phase 3, the guideline will be disseminated and validated using prospectively collected clinical data in a separate effort of the AO Spine Knowledge Forum Degenerative in a global multicenter clinical study.

17.
Global Spine J ; 14(2_suppl): 120S-128S, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38421323

RESUMO

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVE: Examine the clinical evidence for the use of osteobiologics in hybrid surgery (combined anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and total disc replacement (TDR)) in patients with multilevel cervical degenerative disc disease (DDD). METHODS: PubMed and Embase were searched between January 2000 and August 2020. Clinical studies investigating 18-80 year old patients with multilevel cervical DDD who underwent hybrid surgery with or without the use of osteobiologics were considered eligible. Two reviewers independently screened and assessed the identified articles. The methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) tool and the risk of bias (RoB 2.0) assessment tool were used to assess risk of bias. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) was used to evaluate quality of evidence across studies per outcome. RESULTS: Eleven studies were included. A decrease in cervical range of motion was observed in most studies for both the hybrid surgery and the control groups consisting of stand-alone ACDF or TDR. Fusion rates of 70-100% were reported in both the hybrid surgery and control groups consisting of stand-alone ACDF. The hybrid surgery group performed better or comparable to the control group in terms of adjacent segment degeneration. Studies reported an improvement in visual analogue scale for pain and neck disability index values after surgery compared to preoperative scores for both treatment groups. The included studies had moderate methodological quality. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence for assessing the use of osteobiologics in multilevel hybrid surgery and additional high quality and controlled research is deemed essential.

18.
Global Spine J ; 14(2_suppl): 43S-58S, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38421326

RESUMO

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical and radiographic outcomes as well as complications of unplated vs plated anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery considering the role of osteobiologics in single- and multi-level procedures. METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, EMBASE, CENTRAL, Cochrane and ClinicalTrials.gov databases was performed. Briefly, we sought to identify studies comparing unplated vs. plated ACDF for cervical degenerative disc disease reporting the use of osteobiologics in terms of clinical outcomes, radiographic fusion, and complications. Data on study population, follow-up time, type of cage and plate used, type of osteobiologic employed, number of levels treated, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), radiographic outcomes and complications were collected and compared. Relevant information was pooled for meta-analyses. RESULTS: Thirty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria. No significant difference was found in terms of clinical outcomes between groups. Unplated ACDF was characterized by reduced blood loss, operation time and length of hospital stay. Fusion was achieved by the majority of patients in both groups, with no evidence of any specific contribution depending on the osteobiologics used. Dysphagia was more commonly associated with anterior plating, while cage subsidence prevailed in the unplated group. CONCLUSION: Unplated and plated ACDF seem to provide similar outcomes irrespective of the osteobiologic used, with minor differences with doubtful clinical significance. However, the heterogeneity and high risk of bias affecting included studies markedly prevent significant conclusions.

19.
Global Spine J ; 14(2_suppl): 6S-13S, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38421322

RESUMO

STUDY DESIGN: Guideline. OBJECTIVES: To develop an international guideline (AOGO) about the use of osteobiologics in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for treating degenerative spine conditions. METHODS: The guideline development process was guided by AO Spine Knowledge Forum Degenerative (KF Degen) and followed the Guideline International Network McMaster Guideline Development Checklist. The process involved 73 participants with expertise in degenerative spine diseases and surgery from 22 countries. Fifteen systematic reviews were conducted addressing respective key topics and evidence was collected. The methodologist compiled the evidence into GRADE Evidence-to-Decision frameworks. Guideline panel members judged the outcomes and other criteria and made the final recommendations through consensus. RESULTS: Five conditional recommendations were created. A conditional recommendation is about the use of allograft, autograft or a cage with an osteobiologic in primary ACDF surgery. Other conditional recommendations are about the use of osteobiologic for single- or multi-level ACDF, and for hybrid construct surgery. It is suggested that surgeons use other osteobiologics rather than human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP-2) in common clinical situations. Surgeons are recommended to choose 1 graft over another or 1 osteobiologic over another primarily based on clinical situation, and the costs and availability of the materials. CONCLUSION: This AOGO guideline is the first to provide recommendations for the use of osteobiologics in ACDF. Despite the comprehensive searches for evidence, there were few studies completed with small sample sizes and primarily as case series with inherent risks of bias. Therefore, high-quality clinical evidence is demanded to improve the guideline.

20.
Global Spine J ; 14(2_suppl): 24S-33S, 2024 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38421330

RESUMO

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic Review of the Literature. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review describing fusion rates for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) using autograft vs various interbody devices augmented with different osteobiologic materials. METHODS: A systematic review limited to the English language was performed in Medline, Embase and Cochrane library using Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms. Studies that evaluated fusion after ACDF using autografts and osteobiologics combined with PEEK, carbon fibre, or metal cages were searched for. Articles in full text that met the criteria were included in the review. The main outcomes evaluated were the time taken to merge, the definition of the fusion assessment, and the modality of the fusion assessment. The risk of bias of each article was assessed by the MINORS score or ROB 2.0 depending on the randomisation process. RESULTS: The total number of references reviewed was six hundred and eighty-two. After applying the inclusion criteria, 54 were selected for the retrieval of the full text. Eight studies were selected and included for final analysis in this study. Fusion rates were reported between 83.3% and 100% for autograft groups compared to 46.5% and 100% for various interbody device/osteobiological combinations. The overall quality of the evidence in all radiographic fusion studies was considered insufficient due to a serious risk of bias. CONCLUSION: Mechanical interbody devices augmented with osteobiologics performed similarly to autografts in terms of reliability and efficacy. Their time to fusion and fusion rate were comparable to autografts at the end of the final follow-up.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA