Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Spinal Disord Tech. 2013 Jul;26(5):233-8. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0b013e3182440162.

Use of autogenous bone graft compared with RhBMP in high-risk patients: a comparison of fusion rates and time to fusion.

Author information

  • 1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN:

A retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE:

To evaluate whether recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein (rhBMP-2) can improve fusion rates and time to fusion in high-risk patients when compared with autograft in lumbar posterolateral fusion.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA:

The use of rhBMP-2 in the general population for posterolateral fusion has resulted in relatively good reported outcomes; however, it is currently considered "off-label" use. Few studies, however, have determined the outcomes of rhBMP-2 when used in patients with numerous risk factors for a pseudarthrosis.

METHODS:

One hundred ninety-five patients were divided into 4 groups depending on fusion material and the presence/absence of fusion-related risk factors for nonunions; group A was defined as rhBMP-2 used in the presence of high-risk factors (FRRF), group B was defined as rhBMP-2 used in the absence of FRRF, group C was defined as autograft used in the presence of FRRF, and group D was defined as autograft used in the absence of FRRF. The time to fusion, fusion rate were compared between each group.

RESULTS:

The time to fusion was significantly faster in group B than in group D in patients with no history of smoking (P<0.05), hypertension (P<0.01), or other significant comorbidity (P<0.05). The time to complete fusion was also significantly faster in group B than in group D in patients under the age of 65 (P<0.05), patients undergoing primary surgery (P<0.05), single-level surgery (P<0.01), no smoking history (P<0.05), no diabetes mellitus (P<0.01), no hypertension (P=0.001), no osteoporosis (P<0.01), and no significant comorbidity (P<0.01). Although the fusion rate was higher in group B than in group D, with the exception of sex and single-level surgery, there were no significant differences between groups B and D. Although initial fusion mass and time to solid fusion was faster in group A than in group C, there were no significant differences between groups A and C. In addition, fusion rates were higher in group C than in group A, looking at all factors except revision surgery, but the differences were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS:

With relative low dosage of rhBMP-2 compared with the dose used in Food and Drug Administration trial, in patients without fusion-related risk factors, rhBMP-2 may lead to acceptable fusion rates and faster fusion time when compared with autograft. Therefore, rhBMP-2 may serve as an acceptable alternative to autogenous bone graft in patients without fusion-related risk factors undergoing instrumented posterolateral lumbar fusions. When compared with patients with fusion-related risk factors, the use of rhBMP-2 was comparable with autograft but was not sufficient to overcome all aspects of the weakened osteoinductive capacity encountered in patients with these risk factors.

[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk