Format

Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
Global Spine J. 2012 Dec;2(4):239-48. doi: 10.1055/s-0032-1315454. Epub 2012 Oct 9.

Improving the clinical evidence of bone graft substitute technology in lumbar spine surgery.

Author information

1
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois.
2
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, UCLA Comprehensive Spine Center, Santa Monica, California.
3
University of Connecticut Medical Center, Farmington, Connecticut.
4
Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois.
5
Emory Spine Center, Atlanta, Georgia.
6
Durango Orthopedic Associates, PC/Spine Colorado.
7
University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.
8
Resources for Medical Education and Collaboration, Durango, Colorado.

Abstract

Bone graft substitutes have been used routinely for spine fusion for decades, yet clinical evidence establishing comparative data remains sparse. With recent scrutiny paid to the outcomes, complications, and costs associated with osteobiologics, a need to improve available data guiding efficacious use exists. We review the currently available clinical literature, studying the outcomes of various biologics in posterolateral lumbar spine fusion, and establish the need for a multicenter, independent osteobiologics registry.

KEYWORDS:

autograft; biologics; bone graft substitute; bone morphogenetic protein; ceramics; demineralized bone matrix; osteobiologics; spine fusion

PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart, New York Icon for PubMed Central
    Loading ...
    Support Center