Literature DB >> 16163514

A prospective, randomised controlled trial of femoral ring allograft versus a titanium cage in circumferential lumbar spinal fusion with minimum 2-year clinical results.

Patrick J McKenna1, Brian J C Freeman, Robert C Mulholland, Michael P Grevitt, John K Webb, S H Mehdian.   

Abstract

The literature reports on the safety and efficacy of titanium cages (TCs) with additional posterior fixation for anterior lumbar interbody fusion. However, these papers are limited to prospective cohort studies. The introduction of TCs for spinal fusion has resulted in increased costs, without evidence of superiority over the established practice. There are currently no prospective controlled trials comparing TCs to femoral ring allografts (FRAs) for circumferential fusion in the literature. In this prospective, randomised controlled trial, our objective was to compare the clinical outcome following the use of FRA (current practice) to the use of TC in circumferential lumbar spinal fusion. Full ethical committee approval and institutional research and development departmental approval were obtained. Power calculations estimated a total of 80 patients (40 in each arm) would be required to detect clinically relevant differences in functional outcome. Eighty-three patients were recruited for the study fulfilling strict entry requirements (>6 months chronic discogenic low back pain, failure of conservative treatment, one- or two-level discographically proven discogenic low back pain). The patients completed the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analogue Score (VAS) for back and leg pain and the Short-Form 36 (SF-36) preoperatively and also postoperatively at 6, 12 and 24 months, respectively. The results were available for all the 83 patients with a mean follow-up of 28 months (range 24-75 months). Five patients were excluded on the basis of technical infringements (unable to insert TC in four patients and FRA in one patient due to the narrowing of the disc space). From the remaining 78 patients randomised, 37 received the FRA and 41 received the TC. Posterior stabilisation was achieved with translaminar or pedicle screws. Baseline demographic data (age, sex, smoking history, number of operated levels and preoperative outcome measures) showed no statistical difference between groups (p<0.05) other than for the vitality domain of the SF-36. For patients who received the FRA, mean VAS (back pain) improved by 2.0 points (p<0.01), mean ODI improved by 15 points (p=<0.01) and mean SF-36 scores improved by >11 points in all domains (p<0.03) except that of general health and emotional role. For patients who received the TC, mean VAS improved by 1.1 points (p=0.004), mean ODI improved by 6 points (p=0.01) and SF-36 improved significantly in only two of the eight domains (bodily pain and physical function). Revision procedures and complications were similar in both groups. In conclusion, this prospective, randomised controlled clinical trial shows the use of FRA in circumferential lumbar fusion to be associated with superior clinical outcomes when compared to those observed following the use of TCs. The use of TCs for circumferential lumbar spinal fusion is not justified on the basis of inferior clinical outcome and the tenfold increase in cost.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16163514      PMCID: PMC3489262          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-005-1034-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  37 in total

1.  Circumferential lumbar spinal fusion with Brantigan cage versus posterolateral fusion with titanium Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation: a prospective, randomized clinical study of 146 patients.

Authors:  Finn B Christensen; Ebbe S Hansen; Søren P Eiskjaer; Kristian Høy; Peter Helmig; Pavel Neumann; Bent Niedermann; Cody E Bünger
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2002-12-01       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Transperitoneal Approach to the Intervertebral Disc in the Lumbar Area.

Authors:  J D Lane; E S Moore
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1948-03       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 3.  Spine update lumbar interbody cages.

Authors:  B K Weiner; R D Fraser
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1998-03-01       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Pseudarthrosis repair. Autogenous iliac crest versus femoral ring allograft.

Authors:  D B Cohen; A Chotivichit; T Fujita; T H Wong; C B Huckell; A N Sieber; J P Kostuik; H C Lawson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Radiological and functional outcome after anterior lumbar interbody spinal fusion.

Authors:  F B Christensen; B Karlsmose; E S Hansen; C E Bünger
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Functional and clinical results after anterior interbody lumbar fusion.

Authors:  H Tiusanen; H Hurri; S Seitsalo; K Osterman; R Harju
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Arterial complications following anterior lumbar interbody fusion: report of eight cases.

Authors:  Samir S Kulkarni; Gary L Lowery; Raymond E Ross; K Ravi Sankar; V Lykomitros
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2002-11-01       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 8.  Anterior lumbar fusion using a hybrid interbody graft. A preliminary radiographic report.

Authors:  D C Holte; J P O'Brien; P Renton
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Simultaneous combined anterior and posterior lumbar fusion with femoral cortical allograft.

Authors:  U Liljenqvist; J P O'Brien; P Renton
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Assessing health-related quality of life in patients with sciatica.

Authors:  D L Patrick; R A Deyo; S J Atlas; D E Singer; A Chapin; R B Keller
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1995-09-01       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  12 in total

1.  PEEK versus metal cages in posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a clinical and radiological comparative study.

Authors:  F Cuzzocrea; A Ivone; E Jannelli; A Fioruzzi; E Ferranti; R Vanelli; F Benazzo
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2018-12-10

2.  Anterior interbody arthrodesis with percutaneous posterior pedicle fixation for degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  D Greg Anderson; Amirali Sayadipour; Kevin Shelby; Todd J Albert; Alexander R Vaccaro; Michael S Weinstein
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-04-13       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  Surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylosis.

Authors:  J N A Gibson; G Waddell
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2005-10-19

Review 4.  The myth of lumbar instability: the importance of abnormal loading as a cause of low back pain.

Authors:  R C Mulholland
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-02-27       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: comparison of titanium and polyetheretherketone cages.

Authors:  Mario Cabraja; Soner Oezdemir; Daniel Koeppen; Stefan Kroppenstedt
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2012-09-14       Impact factor: 2.362

6.  The Memory Metal Spinal System in a Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion (PLIF) Procedure: A Prospective, Non-Comparative Study to Evaluate the Safety and Performance.

Authors:  D Kok; M Grevitt; Fh Wapstra; Ag Veldhuizen
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2012-06-15

Review 7.  Quality and Quantity of Published Studies Evaluating Lumbar Fusion during the Past 10 Years: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Robert Hart; Jeffrey T Hermsmeyer; Rajiv K Sethi; Daniel C Norvell
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2015-06

8.  Total Disc Replacement Versus Anterior-Posterior Interbody Fusion in the Lumbar Spine and Lumbosacral Junction: A Cost Analysis.

Authors:  Timo Stubig; Malik Ahmed; Amir Ghasemi; Luigi Aurelio Nasto; Michael Grevitt
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2017-07-20

Review 9.  The contribution of RCTs to quality management and their feasibility in practice.

Authors:  Jens Ivar Brox
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-05-01       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  The memory metal minimal access cage: a new concept in lumbar interbody fusion-a prospective, noncomparative study to evaluate the safety and performance.

Authors:  D Kok; R D Donk; F H Wapstra; A G Veldhuizen
Journal:  Adv Orthop       Date:  2012-04-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.