Hui Huang1, Chun Jiang, ZhenZhou Feng, Xiaoxing Jiang. 1. Department of Orthopedics Surgery, Shanghai Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, 180 Fenglin Road, Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China.
Abstract
PURPOSE: A self-control study was designed to compare the process of creeping substitution between allograft bone and local bone grafting in lumbar interbody fusion. METHODS:From December 2011 to July 2012, 81 patients (mean age: 56.4) were included in this study and randomly allocated to two groups. Leopard cages were using in unilateral instrumentation transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. In group 1, the cages were filled with the local bone on the side of the instrumentation and allograft bone on the other side. In group 2, they were totally filled with the local bone chips. Then, the special CT-reconstructions were made at 6- and 12-month follow-up. On the sagittal section, the sections of CT-reconstructions were perpendicular to the lateral axis of the cage from the side of the cage to the other side. Similarly, they were parallel to the lateral axis of the cage on the coronal section and intervertebral space on the cross section. The mean area size of bone mass on both sides of the cage was calculated, respectively, using image analysis software (Osirix, version 3.3.2) on each section in two groups. RESULTS: In group 1, at 6- and 12-month follow-up, significant differences were observed in the mean area size of bone mass between allograft bone and local bone grafting on the coronal, cross, and sagittal section. In group 2, the mean area size of local bone on both sides of the cage had no significant differences at 6- and 12-month follow-up on each section. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study showed a superiority of local bone grafting over allograft bone.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: A self-control study was designed to compare the process of creeping substitution between allograft bone and local bone grafting in lumbar interbody fusion. METHODS: From December 2011 to July 2012, 81 patients (mean age: 56.4) were included in this study and randomly allocated to two groups. Leopard cages were using in unilateral instrumentation transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. In group 1, the cages were filled with the local bone on the side of the instrumentation and allograft bone on the other side. In group 2, they were totally filled with the local bone chips. Then, the special CT-reconstructions were made at 6- and 12-month follow-up. On the sagittal section, the sections of CT-reconstructions were perpendicular to the lateral axis of the cage from the side of the cage to the other side. Similarly, they were parallel to the lateral axis of the cage on the coronal section and intervertebral space on the cross section. The mean area size of bone mass on both sides of the cage was calculated, respectively, using image analysis software (Osirix, version 3.3.2) on each section in two groups. RESULTS: In group 1, at 6- and 12-month follow-up, significant differences were observed in the mean area size of bone mass between allograft bone and local bone grafting on the coronal, cross, and sagittal section. In group 2, the mean area size of local bone on both sides of the cage had no significant differences at 6- and 12-month follow-up on each section. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study showed a superiority of local bone grafting over allograft bone.