The Use of Osteobiologics in Single versus Multi-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Systematic Review

Author:

Hoffmann Jim1ORCID,Ricciardi Guillermo A.23ORCID,Yurac Ratko45ORCID,Meisel Hans Jörg6ORCID,Buser Zorica78,Qian Bangping9ORCID,Vergroesen Pieter-Paul A.10,

Affiliation:

1. Department of Orthopaedics, Alrijne Hospital, Leiderdorp, The Netherlands

2. Spine Surgery, Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Centro Mdico Integral Fitz Roy, Buenos Aires, Argentina

3. Spine Surgery, Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Sanatorio Gemes, Buenos Aires, Argentina

4. Professor associate of Orthopedics and Traumatology, University of Development, Santiago, Chile

5. Spine Unit, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Clinica Alemana, Santiago, Chile

6. Department of Neurosurgery, BG Klinikum Bergmannstrost, Halle, Germany

7. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, USA

8. Gerling Institute, Brooklyn, NY, USA

9. Division of Spine Surgery, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital, The Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School University, Nanjing, China

10. Department of Orthopaedics, Noordwest Hospitals, Alkmaar, The Netherlands

Abstract

Study Design Systematic literature review. Objectives In this study we assessed evidence for the use of osteobiologics in single vs multi-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in patients with cervical spine degeneration. The primary objective was to compare fusion rates after single and multi-level surgery with different osteobiologics. Secondary objectives were to compare differences in patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) and complications. Methods After a global team of reviewers was selected, a systematic review using different repositories was performed, confirming to PRISMA and GRADE guidelines. In total 1206 articles were identified and after applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 11 articles were eligible for analysis. Extracted data included fusion rates, definition of fusion, patient reported outcome measures, types of osteobiologics used, complications, adverse events and revisions. Results Fusion rates ranged from 87.7% to 100% for bone morphogenetic protein 2 (BMP-2) and 88.6% to 94.7% for demineralized bone matrix, while fusion rates reported for other osteobiologics were lower. All included studies showed PROMs improved significantly for each osteobiologic. However, no differences were reported when comparing osteobiologics, or when comparing single vs multi-level surgery specifically. Conclusion The highest fusion rates after 2-level ACDF for cervical spine degeneration were reported when BMP-2 was used. However, PROMs did not differ between the different osteobiologics. Further blinded randomized trials should be performed to compare the use of BMP-2 in single vs multi-level ACDF specifically.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3