Joseph D Smucker1, Emily B Petersen, Douglas C Fredericks. 1. Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Bone Healing Research Lab/Iowa Spine Research Center, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA 52242, USA. joe@smuckermd.com
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Randomized, controlled study in a laboratory setting. Blinded observations/assessment of study outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the performance characteristics of MASTERGRAFT PUTTY as a bone graft extender in a rabbit posterolateral spine fusion model. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The rabbit posterolateral fusion model is an established environment for testing of fusion concepts. It offers the opportunity to obtain radiographical, histological, and biomechanical data on novel fusion materials. METHODS: Thirty-six rabbits were entered into the study with 30 used for analysis. Bilateral posterolateral lumbar intertransverse fusions were performed at L5-L6. The lateral two-thirds of the transverse processes were decorticated and covered with graft material: autograft only (2.5-3.0 cc per side), 25% MASTERGRAFT PUTTY/75% autograft (3.0 cc total per side), or 50% MASTERGRAFT PUTTY and 50% autograft (3.0 cc total per side). Animals were humanely killed at 8 weeks postsurgery. RESULTS: The autograft group had a 63% radiographical fusion rate (5 of 8) and correlated with manual palpation results (63%). The 25% MASTERGRAFT PUTTY group had a 73% radiographical fusion rate (8 of 11) and a manual palpation fusion rate of 64%. The 50% MASTERGRAFT PUTTY group demonstrated a 91% (10 of 11) radiographical fusion rate and 73% manual palpation fusion rate. Histologically, no inflammatory reactions were evident regardless of implant. The 2 MASTERGRAFT PUTTY groups had new bone in direct apposition to the MASTERGRAFT ceramic granules. CONCLUSION: In this commonly used rabbit posterolateral fusion model, MASTERGRAFT PUTTY in an autograft extender mode produces clinically and radiographically similar results to autograft fusion alone.
STUDY DESIGN: Randomized, controlled study in a laboratory setting. Blinded observations/assessment of study outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the performance characteristics of MASTERGRAFT PUTTY as a bone graft extender in a rabbit posterolateral spine fusion model. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The rabbit posterolateral fusion model is an established environment for testing of fusion concepts. It offers the opportunity to obtain radiographical, histological, and biomechanical data on novel fusion materials. METHODS: Thirty-six rabbits were entered into the study with 30 used for analysis. Bilateral posterolateral lumbar intertransverse fusions were performed at L5-L6. The lateral two-thirds of the transverse processes were decorticated and covered with graft material: autograft only (2.5-3.0 cc per side), 25% MASTERGRAFT PUTTY/75% autograft (3.0 cc total per side), or 50% MASTERGRAFT PUTTY and 50% autograft (3.0 cc total per side). Animals were humanely killed at 8 weeks postsurgery. RESULTS: The autograft group had a 63% radiographical fusion rate (5 of 8) and correlated with manual palpation results (63%). The 25% MASTERGRAFT PUTTY group had a 73% radiographical fusion rate (8 of 11) and a manual palpation fusion rate of 64%. The 50% MASTERGRAFT PUTTY group demonstrated a 91% (10 of 11) radiographical fusion rate and 73% manual palpation fusion rate. Histologically, no inflammatory reactions were evident regardless of implant. The 2 MASTERGRAFT PUTTY groups had new bone in direct apposition to the MASTERGRAFT ceramic granules. CONCLUSION: In this commonly used rabbit posterolateral fusion model, MASTERGRAFT PUTTY in an autograft extender mode produces clinically and radiographically similar results to autograft fusion alone.
Authors: Madison A P McGough; Stefanie M Shiels; Lauren A Boller; Katarzyna J Zienkiewicz; Craig L Duvall; Joseph C Wenke; Scott A Guelcher Journal: Tissue Eng Part A Date: 2019-01-09 Impact factor: 3.845
Authors: Douglas C Fredericks; Emily B Petersen; Nikhil Sahai; Katherine Gibson N Corley; Nicole DeVries; Nicole M Grosland; Joseph D Smucker Journal: Iowa Orthop J Date: 2013
Authors: Frank G Lyons; John P Gleeson; Sonia Partap; Karen Coghlan; Fergal J O'Brien Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2014-01-03 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Andrew J Harmata; Yun Ma; Carlos J Sanchez; Katarzyna J Zienkiewicz; Florent Elefteriou; Joseph C Wenke; Scott A Guelcher Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2015-07-23 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Lukas A van Dijk; Davide Barbieri; Florence Barrère-de Groot; Huipin Yuan; Rema Oliver; Chris Christou; William R Walsh; Joost D de Bruijn Journal: J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater Date: 2019-01-07 Impact factor: 3.368
Authors: Lauren A Boller; Madison A P McGough; Stefanie M Shiels; Craig L Duvall; Joseph C Wenke; Scott A Guelcher Journal: Materials (Basel) Date: 2021-07-15 Impact factor: 3.623