Effectiveness and Safety of Recombinant Human Bone Morphogenetic Protein-2 Versus Local Bone Graft in Primary Lumbar Interbody Fusions

被引:24
|
作者
Adams, Cameron Louis [1 ]
Ogden, Kathryn [1 ]
Robertson, Iain Kilpatrick [2 ]
Broadhurst, Stephen [3 ]
Edis, David [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Tasmania, Sch Med, Launceston, Tas 7250, Australia
[2] Univ Tasmania, Sch Human Life Sci, Launceston, Tas 7250, Australia
[3] Univ Tasmania, Launceston, Tas 7250, Australia
[4] Univ Tasmania, Launceston Hosp, Launceston, Tas 7250, Australia
关键词
bone morphogenetic protein; local bone graft; lumbar fusion; OSWESTRY DISABILITY INDEX; SPINE SURGERY; RHBMP-2; OSTEOLYSIS; QUESTIONNAIRE; OUTCOMES; SERIES;
D O I
10.1097/BRS.0000000000000089
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Study Design. Retrospective cohort study. Objective. To compare clinical outcomes, fusion rates, and rates of complications in posterior lumbar interbody fusions (PLIFs) and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion procedures with either recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) and local bone graft (LBG) or LBG alone used as graft material. Summary of Background Data. rhBMP-2 is often used in PLIF and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion procedures, but is associated with complications. Furthermore, recent evidence suggests that using LBG may be sufficient to induce fusion. Methods. All patients who underwent primary interbody fusions under a single surgeon were identified from the surgeon's records. In November 2008, the surgeon changed from routinely using LBG to using LBG and rhBMP-2 routinely, limiting selection bias. A retrospective review of prospectively collected data preoperatively and up to 12 months postoperatively was performed. Data collected included visual analogue scale, pain scores for back and leg, Oswestry Disability Index scores, Short-Form 36 (SF-36), standing lumbar radiographs, and clinical notes. Results. Seventy-seven patients met the study criteria and 70 consented to be part of the study. Fifty-one were treated with rhBMP-2 and 19 with LBG. At 12-month follow-up, no significant differences were seen in visual analogue scale score, Oswestry Disability Index score, or SF-36 scores. A total of 89.5% of the LBG group and 94.1% of the rhBMP-2 group went on to show radiographical evidence of fusion by 12-month follow-up (P = 0.61). The rhMBP-2 group had a higher complication rate (41.2% vs. 10.5%, incidence rate ratio = 3.91, P = 0.05). Conclusion. In comparison we found no difference in clinical outcomes, comparable rates of fusion and a significant increase in complication rates with rhBMP-2. Using rhBMP-2 may unnecessarily increase the risk of complication in routine PLIF and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion procedures.
引用
收藏
页码:164 / 171
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Complications Associated With the Use of the Recombinant Human Bone Morphogenetic Proteins for Posterior Interbody Fusions of the Lumbar Spine
    Chrastil, Jesse
    Low, Jeffrey B.
    Whang, Peter G.
    Patel, Alpesh A.
    SPINE, 2013, 38 (16) : E1020 - E1027
  • [32] Bone union rate with recombinant human bone morphogenic protein-2 versus autologous iliac bone in PEEK cages for anterior lumbar interbody fusion
    Charles-Henri Flouzat-Lachaniette
    Amir Ghazanfari
    Charlie Bouthors
    Alexandre Poignard
    Philippe Hernigou
    Jérôme Allain
    International Orthopaedics, 2014, 38 : 2001 - 2007
  • [33] Bone union rate with recombinant human bone morphogenic protein-2 versus autologous iliac bone in PEEK cages for anterior lumbar interbody fusion
    Flouzat-Lachaniette, Charles-Henri
    Ghazanfari, Amir
    Bouthors, Charlie
    Poignard, Alexandre
    Hernigou, Philippe
    Allain, Jerome
    INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2014, 38 (09) : 2001 - 2007
  • [34] Local bone formation by injection of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 contained in polymer carriers
    Saito, N
    Okada, T
    Horiuchi, H
    Ota, H
    Takahashi, J
    Murakami, N
    Nawata, M
    Kojima, S
    Nozaki, K
    Takaoka, K
    BONE, 2003, 32 (04) : 381 - 386
  • [35] A new recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 carrier for bone regeneration
    Yokota, S
    Sonohara, S
    Yoshida, M
    Murai, M
    Shimokawa, S
    Fujimoto, R
    Fukushima, S
    Kokubo, S
    Nozaki, K
    Takahashi, K
    Uchida, T
    Yokohama, S
    Sonobe, T
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICS, 2001, 223 (1-2) : 69 - 79
  • [36] Bone marrow and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 in osseous repair
    Lane, JM
    Yasko, AW
    Tomin, E
    Cole, BJ
    Waller, S
    Browne, M
    Turek, T
    Gross, J
    CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 1999, (361) : 216 - 227
  • [37] PERIODONTAL REGENERATION AND RECOMBINANT HUMAN BONE MORPHOGENETIC PROTEIN-2
    KING, GN
    CRUCHLEY, AC
    HUGHES, FJ
    JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH, 1995, 74 : 592 - 592
  • [38] Accelerators of Osteogenesis by Recombinant Human Bone Morphogenetic Protein-2
    Okubo, Yasunori
    Kusumoto, Kenji
    Bessho, Kazuhisa
    DRUG TARGET INSIGHTS, 2007, 2 : 55 - 60
  • [39] RECOMBINANT HUMAN BONE MORPHOGENETIC PROTEIN-2 IN SPINE SURGERY
    Hsu, Wellington K.
    JBJS REVIEWS, 2014, 2 (06)
  • [40] Clinical evaluation of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2
    Valentin-Opran, A
    Wozney, J
    Csimma, C
    Lilly, L
    Riedel, GE
    CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH, 2002, (395) : 110 - 120