Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society

The Korean Neurosurgical Society (대한신경외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of Fusion Rate between Demineralized Bone Matrix versus Autograft in Lumbar Fusion : Meta-Analysis

  • Han, Sanghyun (Department of Neurosurgery, Chungnam National University Hospital, Chungnam National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Park, Bumsoo (Department of Neurosurgery, Chungnam National University Hospital, Chungnam National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Lim, Jeong-Wook (Department of Neurosurgery, Chungnam National University Hospital, Chungnam National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Youm, Jin-Young (Department of Neurosurgery, Chungnam National University Hospital, Chungnam National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Choi, Seoung-Won (Department of Neurosurgery, Chungnam National University Hospital, Chungnam National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Dae Hwan (Department of Neurosurgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Ahn, Dong Ki (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul Sacred Heart General Hospital)
  • Received : 2019.10.04
  • Accepted : 2020.01.17
  • Published : 2020.11.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The demineralized bone matrix (DBM) as the bone graft material to increase the fusion rate was widely used in spinal fusion. The current study aimed to compare the fusion rate of DBM to the fusion rate of autograft in lumbar spine fusion via meta-analysis of published literature. After systematic search, comparative studies were selected according to eligibility criteria. Checklist (risk of bias assessment tool for non-randomized study) was used to evaluate the risk of bias of the included nonrandomized controlled studies. The corresponding 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated. We also used subgroup analysis to analyze the fusion rate of posterolateral lumbar fusion and lumbar interbody fusion. Eight studies were finally included in this meta-analysis. These eight studies included 581 patients. Among them, 337 patients underwent spinal fusion surgery using DBM (DBM group) and 204 patients underwent spinal fusion surgery with mainly autologous bone and without using DBM (control group). There was no significant differences of fusion rate between the two groups in posterolateral fusion analysis (risk ratio [RR], 1.03; 95% CI, 0.90-1.17; p=0.66) and interbody fusion analysis (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.91-1.39; p=0.27). Based on the available evidence, the use of DBM with autograft in posterolateral lumbar spine fusion and lumbar interbody fusion showed a slightly higher fusion rate than that of autograft alone; however, there was no statistically different between two groups.

Keywords

References

  1. Aghdasi B, Montgomery SR, Daubs MD, Wang JC : A review of demineralized bone matrices for spinal fusion: the evidence for efficacy. Surgeon 11 : 39-48, 2013 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surge.2012.08.001
  2. Ahn DK, Moon SH, Kim TW, Boo KH, Hong SW : Demineralized bone matrix, as a graft enhancer of auto-local bone in posterior lumbar interbody fusion. Asian Spine J 8 : 129-137, 2014 https://doi.org/10.4184/asj.2014.8.2.129
  3. Arrington ED, Smith WJ, Chambers HG, Bucknell AL, Davino NA : Complications of iliac crest bone graft harvesting. Clin Orthop Relat Res 329 : 300-309, 1996 https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-199608000-00037
  4. Bae H, Zhao L, Zhu D, Kanim LE, Wang JC, Delamarter RB : Variability across ten production lots of a single demineralized bone matrix product. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92 : 427-435, 2010 https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.H.01400
  5. Bae HW, Zhao L, Kanim LE, Wong P, Delamarter RB, Dawson EG : Intervariability and intravariability of bone morphogenetic proteins in commercially available demineralized bone matrix products. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31 : 1299-1306; discussion 1307-1308, 2006 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000218581.92992.b7
  6. Cammisa FP Jr, Lowery G, Garfin SR, Geisler FH, Klara PM, McGuire RA, et al. : Two-year fusion rate equivalency between Grafton DBM gel and autograft in posterolateral spine fusion: a prospective controlled trial employing a side-by-side comparison in the same patient. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 29 : 660-666, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.BRS.0000116588.17129.B9
  7. Chen WJ, Tsai TT, Chen LH, Niu CC, Lai PL, Fu TS, et al. : The fusion rate of calcium sulfate with local autograft bone compared with autologous iliac bone graft for instrumented short-segment spinal fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30 : 2293-2297, 2005 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000182087.35335.05
  8. Choi DJ, Ahn DK, Lee S, Park HS, Jeon YW, Yang SJ, et al. : The effect of demineralized bone matrix as a graft enhancer in posterior lumbar interbody fusion using cage and local bone chips. J Korean Soc Spine Surg 15 : 157-164, 2008 https://doi.org/10.4184/jkss.2008.15.3.157
  9. Fay LY, Chang CC, Chang HK, Tu TH, Tsai TY, Wu CL, et al. : A Hybrid dynamic stabilization and fusion system in multilevel lumbar spondylosis. Neurospine 15 : 231-241, 2018 https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.1836108.054
  10. Fischgrund JS, Mackay M, Herkowitz HN, Brower R, Montgomery DM, Kurz LT : 1997 Volvo Award winner in clinical studies. Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis: a prospective, randomized study comparing decompressive laminectomy and arthrodesis with and without spinal instrumentation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 22 : 2807-2812, 1997 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199712150-00003
  11. France JC, Yaszemski MJ, Lauerman WC, Cain JE, Glover JM, Lawson KJ, et al. : A randomized prospective study of posterolateral lumbar fusion. Outcomes with and without pedicle screw instrumentation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 24 : 553-560, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199903150-00010
  12. Fu TS, Wang IC, Lu ML, Hsieh MK, Chen LH, Chen WJ : The fusion rate of demineralized bone matrix compared with autogenous iliac bone graft for long multi-segment posterolateral spinal fusion Orthopedics and biomechanics. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 17 : 3, 2016 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-015-0861-2
  13. Higgins JP, Green S : Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews for interventions, ed 4. West Sussex : John Wiley & Sons Ltd, 2011
  14. Kadam A, Millhouse PW, Kepler CK, Radcliff KE, Fehlings MG, Janssen ME, et al. : Bone substitutes and expanders in spine surgery: a review of their fusion efficacies. Int J Spine Surg 10 : 33, 2016 https://doi.org/10.14444/3033
  15. Kang J, An H, Hilibrand A, Yoon ST, Kavanagh E, Boden S : Grafton and local bone have comparable outcomes to iliac crest bone in instrumented single-level lumbar fusions. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 37 : 1083-1091, 2012 https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31823ed817
  16. Kornblum MB, Fischgrund JS, Herkowitz HN, Abraham DA, Berkower DL, Ditkoff JS : Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis: a prospective long-term study comparing fusion and pseudarthrosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 29 : 726-733; discussion 733-734, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.BRS.0000119398.22620.92
  17. Lee JH : Development of osteoconductive and osteoinductive bone healing materials. Bone Abstracts 5 : SS4.3, 2016
  18. Lin L, Chow KL, Leng Y : Study of hydroxyapatite osteoinductivity with an osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells. J Biomed Mater Res A 89 : 326-335, 2009
  19. Louis-Ugbo J, Murakami H, Kim HS, Minamide A, Boden SD : Evidence of osteoinduction by Grafton demineralized bone matrix in nonhuman primate spinal fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 29 : 360-366; discussion Z1, 2004 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.BRS.0000090823.12652.F9
  20. Madan S, Boeree NR : Outcome of posterior lumbar interbody fusion versus posterolateral fusion for spondylolytic spondylolisthesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 27 : 1536-1542, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200207150-00011
  21. Martin GJ Jr, Boden SD, Titus L, Scarborough NL : New formulations of demineralized bone matrix as a more effective graft alternative in experimental posterolateral lumbar spine arthrodesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 24 : 637-645, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199904010-00005
  22. Mayo BC, Haws BE, Bohl DD, Louie PK, Hijji FY, Narain AS, et al. : Postoperative fever evaluation following lumbar fusion procedures. Neurospine 15 : 154-162, 2018 https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.1836026.013
  23. Morone MA, Boden SD : Experimental posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion with a demineralized bone matrix gel. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 23 : 159-167, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199801150-00003
  24. Nam WD, Yi J : Bone union rate following instrumented posterolateral lumbar fusion: comparison between demineralized bone matrix versus hydroxyapatite. Asian Spine J 10 : 1149-1156, 2016 https://doi.org/10.4184/asj.2016.10.6.1149
  25. Navarro SM, Frankel WC, Haeberle HS, Ramkumar PN : Fixed and variable relationship models to define the volume-value relationship in spinal fusion surgery: a macroeconomic analysis using evidence-based thresholds. Neurospine 15 : 249-260, 2018 https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.1836088.044
  26. Oikarinen J : Experimental spinal fusion with decalcified bone matrix and deep-frozen allogeneic bone in rabbits. Clin Orthop Relat Res (162) : 210-218, 1982
  27. Parajon A, Alimi M, Navarro-Ramirez R, Christos P, Torres-Campa JM, Moriguchi Y, et al. : Minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: meta-analysis of the fusion rates. What is the optimal graft material? Neurosurgery 81 : 958-971, 2017 https://doi.org/10.1093/neuros/nyx141
  28. Rahaman MN, Xiao W, Liu Y, Bal BS : Osteoconductive and Osteoinductive Implants Composed of Hollow Hydroxyapatite Microspheres in Narayan R, Colombo P (eds) : Advances in Bioceramics and Porous Ceramics VII: A Collection of Papers Presented at the 38th International Conference on Advanced Ceramics and Composites January 27-31, 2014 Daytona Beach, Florida. Hoboken : John Wiley & Sons, 2015, Vol 35, p65
  29. Sassard WR, Eidman DK, Gray PM, Block JE, Russo R, Russell JL, et al. : Augmenting local bone with grafton demineralized bone matrix for posterolateral spine fusion: avoiding second site autologous bone harvest. Orthopedics 23 : 1059-1065; discussion 1064-1065, 2000 https://doi.org/10.3928/0147-7447-20001001-17
  30. Schizas C, Triantafyllopoulos D, Kosmopoulos V, Tzinieris N, Stafylas K : Posterolateral lumbar spine fusion using a novel demineralized bone matrix: a controlled case pilot study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 128 : 621-625, 2008 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-007-0495-4
  31. St John TA, Vaccaro AR, Sah AP, Schaefer M, Berta SC, Albert T, et al. : Physical and monetary costs associated with autogenous bone graft harvesting. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 32 : 18-23, 2003 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.1962.tb00259.x
  32. Thalgott JS, Giuffre JM, Fritts K, Timlin M, Klezl Z : Instrumented posterolateral lumbar fusion using coralline hydroxyapatite with or without demineralized bone matrix, as an adjunct to autologous bone. Spine J 1 : 131-137, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1529-9430(01)00011-0
  33. Tsutsumimoto T, Shimogata M, Yoshimura Y, Misawa H : Union versus nonunion after posterolateral lumbar fusion: a comparison of long-term surgical outcomes in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Eur Spine J 17 : 1107-1112, 2008 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-008-0695-9
  34. Ungureanu G, Chitu A, Iancu I, Kakucs C, Maior T, Florian IS : Gender differences in the self-assessment of quality of life and disability after spinal fusion for chronic low back pain at a neurosurgical center in Eastern Europe. Neurospine 15 : 261-268, 2018 https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.1836076.038
  35. Vaccaro AR, Stubbs HA, Block JE : Demineralized bone matrix composite grafting for posterolateral spinal fusion. Orthopedics 30 : 567-570, 2007 https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20070701-06

Cited by

  1. Safety and Tolerability of Stromal Vascular Fraction Combined with β-Tricalcium Phosphate in Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Phase I Clinical Trial vol.9, pp.10, 2020, https://doi.org/10.3390/cells9102250
  2. The Effect of Smoking on the Fusion Rate of Spinal Fusion Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis vol.154, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2021.07.011
  3. Therapeutics for enhancement of spinal fusion: A mini review vol.31, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jot.2021.11.001