Allografts and Spinal Fusion.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Back pain is a common chief complaint within the United States and is caused by a multitude of etiologies. There are many different treatment modalities for back pain, with a frequent option being spinal fusion procedures. The success of spinal fusion greatly depends on instrumentation, construct design, and bone grafts used in surgery. Bone allografts are important for both structural integrity and providing a scaffold for bone fusion to occur.Method
Searches were performed using terms "allografts" and "bone" as well as product names in peer reviewed literature Pubmed, Google Scholar, FDA-510k approvals, and clinicaltrials.gov.Results
This study is a review of allografts and focuses on currently available products and their success in both animal and clinical studies.Conclusion
Bone grafts used in surgery are generally categorized into 3 main types: autogenous (from patient's own body), allograft (from cadaveric or living donor), and synthetic. This paper focuses on allografts and provides an overview on the different subtypes with an emphasis on recent product development and uses in spinal fusion surgery.
SUBMITTER: Cohen JD
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8092936 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThis manuscript is a review of the literature investigating the use of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) being applied in the setting of spinal fusion surgery. We mention the rates of pseudarthrosis, discuss current bone grafting options, and examine the preclinical and clinical outcomes of utilizing MSCs to assist in successfully fusing the spine.MethodsA thorough literature review was conducted to look at current and previous preclinical and clinical studies using stem cells for spinal fusion augmentation. Searches for PubMed/MEDLINE and ClinicalTrials.gov through January 2021 were conducted for literature mentioning stem cells and spinal fusion.ResultsAll preclinical and clinical studies investigating MSC use in spinal fusion were examined. We found 19 preclinical and 17 clinical studies. The majority of studies, both preclinical and clinical, were heterogeneous in design due to different osteoconductive scaffolds, cells, and techniques used. Preclinical studies showed promising outcomes in animal models when using appropriate osteoconductive scaffolds and factors for osteogenic differentiation. Similarly, clinical studies have promising outcomes but differ in their methodologies, surgical techniques, and materials used, making it difficult to adequately compare between the studies.ConclusionMSCs may be a promising option to use to augment grafting for spinal fusion surgery. MSCs must be used with appropriate osteoconductive scaffolds. Cell-based allografts and the optimization of their use have yet to be fully elucidated. Further studies are necessary to determine the efficacy of MSCs with different osteoconductive scaffolds and growth/osteogenic differentiation factors.Level of evidence3.
| S-EPMC8092934 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The biologic steps involved in creating a bony fusion between adjacent segments of the spine are a complex and highly coordinated series of events. There have been significant advancements in bone grafts and bone graft substitutes in order to augment spinal fusion. While autologous bone grafting remains the gold standard, allograft bone grafting, synthetic bone graft substitutes, and bone graft enhancers are appropriate in certain clinical situations. This article provides an overview of the basic biology of spinal fusion and strategies for enhancing fusion through innovations in bone graft material.
| S-EPMC7253544 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7571622 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Whitlockite (WH) is the second most abundant inorganic component of human bone, accounting for approximately 25% of bone tissue. This study investigated the role of WH in bone remodeling and formation in a mouse spinal fusion model. Specifically, morphology and composition analysis, tests of porosity and surface area, thermogravimetric analysis, an ion-release test, and a cell viability test were conducted to analyze the properties of bone substitutes. The MagOss group received WH, Group A received 100% beta-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP), Group B received 100% hydroxyapatite (HAp), Group C received 30% HAp/70% β-TCP, and Group D received 60% HAp/40% β-TCP (n = 10 each). All mice were sacrificed 6 weeks after implantation, and micro-CT, hematoxylin and eosin (HE) staining, and Masson trichome (MT) staining and immunohistochemistry were performed. The MagOss group showed more homogeneous and smaller grains, and nanopores (<500 nm) were found in only the MagOss group. On micro-CT, the MagOss group showed larger fusion mass and better graft incorporation into the decorticate mouse spine than other groups. In the in vivo experiment with HE staining, the MagOss group showed the highest new bone area (mean: decortication group, 9.50%; A, 15.08%; B, 15.70%; C, 14.76%; D, 14.70%; MagOss, 22.69%; p < 0.0001). In MT staining, the MagOss group demonstrated the highest new bone area (mean: decortication group, 15.62%; A, 21.41%; B, 22.86%; C, 23.07%; D, 22.47%; MagOss, 26.29%; p < 0.0001). In an immunohistochemical analysis for osteocalcin, osteopontin, and CD31, the MagOss group showed a higher positive area than other groups. WH showed comparable bone conductivity to HAp and β-TCP and increased new bone formation. WH is likely to be used as an improved bone substitute with better bone conductivity than HAp and β-TCP.
| S-EPMC8657587 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Prior studies, comparing anterior and posterior approaches to lumbar fusion surgery, found similar fusion rates and clinical outcomes, but are limited by sample size. Further evaluation of the postoperative complications of each approach is necessary. Methods The MSpine database by PearlDiver was queried using ICD-9, ICD-10, and CPT codes to identify patients who had undergone single-level anterior or posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery. Readmission rates, ileus, lower extremity DVT, infection, pneumonia, and stroke were used to compare post-operative complications of an anterior vs. posterior approach. Results 112,023 patients were included in this study, with 38,529 (34.4%) in the anterior group (ALIF/LLIF) and 73,494 (65.6%) in the posterior group (PLIF/TLIF). At both 30 and 90-days postoperative, patients undergoing an anterior approach to lumbar interbody fusion had a higher odds ratio of lower extremity DVT (30-day OR: 1.19, 90-day OR: 1.16; P<0.05) and ileus complication (30-day OR: 1.87, P= <.05; 90-day OR: 1.81, P<.05). At both 30 and 90-days postoperative, patients undergoing a posterior approach had a higher odds ratio of stroke (30-day: OR: 0.79, 90-day OR: 0.87; P<0.05), transfusion (30-day OR: 0.66, 90-day OR: 0.69; P<.05), infection (30-day OR: 0.88, 90-day OR: 0.91; P <.05), and pneumonia (30-day OR: 0.85, 90-day OR: 0.90; P<.05). There was no statistically significant difference in myocardial infarction or pulmonary embolism between both approaches at 30 and 90-days postoperative. Conclusions Anterior and posterior approaches for lumbar interbody fusion were associated with differences in postoperative complications at 30 and 90-days. The complication profiles associated with each approach can inform surgeon treatment decisions based on patient profiles.
| S-EPMC9694372 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7253564 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7253565 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveDespite recommendations to discontinue prophylactic antibiotics after incision closure or <24 hours after surgery, prophylactic antibiotics are continued after discharge by some clinicians. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence and factors associated with postdischarge prophylactic antibiotic use after spinal fusion.DesignMulticenter retrospective cohort study.PatientsThis study included patients aged ≥18 years undergoing spinal fusion or refusion between July 2011 and June 2015 at 3 sites. Patients with an infection during the surgical admission were excluded.MethodsProphylactic antibiotics were identified at discharge. Factors associated with postdischarge prophylactic antibiotic use were identified using hierarchical generalized linear models.ResultsIn total, 8,652 spinal fusion admissions were included. Antibiotics were prescribed at discharge in 289 admissions (3.3%). The most commonly prescribed antibiotics were trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (22.1%), cephalexin (18.8%), and ciprofloxacin (17.1%). Adjusted for study site, significant factors associated with prophylactic discharge antibiotics included American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class ≥3 (odds ratio [OR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.00-1.70), lymphoma (OR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.11-5.98), solid tumor (OR, 3.63; 95% CI, 1.62-8.14), morbid obesity (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.09-2.47), paralysis (OR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.30-4.37), hematoma/seroma (OR, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.17-7.33), thoracic surgery (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.01-1.93), longer length of stay, and intraoperative antibiotics.ConclusionsPostdischarge prophylactic antibiotics were uncommon after spinal fusion. Patient and perioperative factors were associated with continuation of prophylactic antibiotics after hospital discharge.
| S-EPMC7641990 | biostudies-literature
Project description:General pediatricians and hospitalists are increasingly summoned to optimize the comorbid conditions of children with medical complexity (CMC) undergoing major surgery. We assessed the relationship between specific chronic conditions of CMC and hospital resource use with spinal fusion for scoliosis, an operation with high cost and morbidity. Retrospective analysis of 7252 children age ≥5 years with an underlying complex chronic condition undergoing spinal fusion between January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2014 in 41 children's hospitals. Hospital length of stay (LOS), cost, and 30-day readmission rate were compared across comorbid conditions by using linear and logistic regression accounting for demographic characteristics and clustering of patients by hospital. Fifty-nine percent of children had ≥4 comorbid conditions. As the number of chronic conditions increased from 1-3 to ≥10, median LOS increased 60% (5 [interquartile range (IQR), 4-7] to 8 [IQR, 5-13] days); median hospital cost increased 53% ($52 319 [IQR, $37 937-71 513] to $80 429 [IQR, $58 602-$111 965]); and readmission rates increased 293% (5.4% to 15.8%) (P < .001 for all). In multivariable analysis, conditions strongly associated with LOS and cost were chronic respiratory insufficiency (LOS: +2.1 days; cost: +$12 070; and bladder dysfunction (LOS: +0.8 days; cost: +$4014) (P < .001 for all). Readmission likelihood was highest with bladder dysfunction (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-2.0) and epilepsy (odds ratio, 1.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-1.5). Chronic respiratory insufficiency, bladder dysfunction, and epilepsy had significant associations with hospital resource use for CMC undergoing spinal fusion. Pediatricians, patients, and families may find it useful to consider these conditions when striving to benefit the children's perioperative health and outcomes.
| S-EPMC5330399 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To evaluate the efficacy of minimally invasive spinal fusion in comparison to open fusion for adult lumbar spondylolisthesis or spondylosis.The present study was conducted as a meta-analysis of all estimates from studies that were selected after comprehensive literature search by two independent reviewers.Of 745 articles, nine prospective cohort studies were identifed. The quality of evidence was downgraded because of study design, inconsistency, imprecision, and publication bias. Greater Oswestry Disability Index score improvement [weighted mean difference (WMD), 3.2; 95% confdence interval (CI), 1.5 to 5.0; p=0.0003] and a lower infection rate (odds ratio, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1 to 0.9; p=0.02) were observed in the minimally invasive group (low-quality evidence). The minimally invasive group had less blood loss (WMD, 269.5 mL; 95% CI, 246.2 to 292.9 mL; p<0.0001), a shorter hospital stay (WMD, 1.3 days; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.5 days, p<0.0001), and longer operation time (WMD, 21.0 minutes; 95% CI, 15.9 to 26.2 minutes; p<0.0001) and radiation exposure time(WMD, 25.4 seconds; 95% CI, 22.0 to 28.8 seconds, p<0.0001) than the open group (low-quality evidence). There were no significant differences in pain improvement, fusion rate, complications, or subsequent surgeries between the two treatment groups (low-quality evidence).Although present findings are limited by insufficient evidence and there is a lack of adequately powered high-quality randomized controlled trials to address this gap in evidence, our results support that minimally invasive lumbar fusion is more effective than open fusion for adult spondylolisthesis and other spondylosis in terms of functional improvement, reducing infection rate, and decreasing blood loss and hospital stay.
| S-EPMC5949295 | biostudies-literature