Literature DB >> 16291117

Carrier materials for spinal fusion.

Brian Kwon1, Louis G Jenis.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The rise in spinal fusion procedures has led to an increase in the available number and variety of bone graft substitutes. As our understanding of the biologic processes that influence bony fusion has improved, appreciation for the role of the carrier material involved in bone grafts has also increased.
PURPOSE: The abundance of products available leaves a surgeon with many choices. Knowledge of the current advances will allow for more critical review of the literature and improved decision making when choosing bone graft materials. STUDY DESIGN/
SETTING: Review of the English-language literature.
METHODS: A critical review of basic science, animal and human studies that investigate the types and role of carrier materials used in spine surgery.
RESULTS: The myriad of carrier material available to the spine surgeon is related to the many options in bone graft material. Allograft is an important osteoconductive agent but has its disadvantages especially in regard to disease transmission and immunogenicity. Collagen in various forms is an effective carrier for bone morphogenic protein and autogenous stem cells and can be easily combined with other bone graft materials. Synthetic options include hydroxyapatite and calcium phosphate ceramic materials with different formulations; all are osteoconductive only but can be combined with osteoinductive and/or osteogenic components. Bioabsorbable carriers are effective for use with bone morphogenic protein and can also be used in multiple forms and settings.
CONCLUSIONS: Many bone graft carriers exist, and multiple studies have shown their efficacy. It appears that no one carrier is ideal but each situation might influence the choice of one carrier over another.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16291117     DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2005.02.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine J        ISSN: 1529-9430            Impact factor:   4.166


  11 in total

Review 1.  Biomaterials for Bone Regenerative Engineering.

Authors:  Xiaohua Yu; Xiaoyan Tang; Shalini V Gohil; Cato T Laurencin
Journal:  Adv Healthc Mater       Date:  2015-04-07       Impact factor: 9.933

2.  Composite chitosan and calcium sulfate scaffold for dual delivery of vancomycin and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2.

Authors:  Heather A Doty; Megan R Leedy; Harry S Courtney; Warren O Haggard; Joel D Bumgardner
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2014-02-07       Impact factor: 3.896

Review 3.  How does the pathophysiological context influence delivery of bone growth factors?

Authors:  Xiaohua Yu; Darilis Suárez-González; Andrew S Khalil; William L Murphy
Journal:  Adv Drug Deliv Rev       Date:  2014-10-17       Impact factor: 15.470

4.  Results of lumbar spondylodeses using different bone grafting materials after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).

Authors:  Nicolas Heinz vonderHoeh; Anna Voelker; Christoph-Eckhard Heyde
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-05-25       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Calcium phosphate combination biomaterials as human mesenchymal stem cell delivery vehicles for bone repair.

Authors:  Sang-Hyug Park; Aliassghar Tofighi; Xiaoqin Wang; Michael Strunk; Thomas Ricketts; Jerry Chang; David L Kaplan
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater       Date:  2011-03-07       Impact factor: 3.368

6.  A level-1 pilot study to evaluate of ultraporous beta-tricalcium phosphate as a graft extender in the posterior correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.

Authors:  Thomas Lerner; Viola Bullmann; Tobias L Schulte; Marc Schneider; Ulf Liljenqvist
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-12-12       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Improved bone morphogenetic protein-2 retention in an injectable collagen matrix using bifunctional peptides.

Authors:  Paul T Hamilton; Michelle S Jansen; Sathya Ganesan; R Edward Benson; Robin Hyde-Deruyscher; Wayne F Beyer; Joseph C Gile; Shrikumar A Nair; Jonathan A Hodges; Hanne Grøn
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-08-08       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Bone Union Rate Following Instrumented Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion: Comparison between Demineralized Bone Matrix versus Hydroxyapatite.

Authors:  Woo Dong Nam; Jemin Yi
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2016-12-08

9.  Bone regeneration in rat cranium critical-size defects induced by Cementum Protein 1 (CEMP1).

Authors:  Janeth Serrano; Enrique Romo; Mercedes Bermúdez; A Sampath Narayanan; Margarita Zeichner-David; Leticia Santos; Higinio Arzate
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-12       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  The effect of particle size on the osteointegration of injectable silicate-substituted calcium phosphate bone substitute materials.

Authors:  Melanie J Coathup; Qian Cai; Charlie Campion; Thomas Buckland; Gordon W Blunn
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater       Date:  2013-01-30       Impact factor: 3.368

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.