Literature DB >> 27498334

Comparison of fusion rate and clinical results between CaO-SiO2-P2O5-B2O3 bioactive glass ceramics spacer with titanium cages in posterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Jae Hyup Lee1, Chang-Bae Kong2, Jae Jun Yang3, Hee-Jong Shim4, Ki-Hyoung Koo3, Jeehyoung Kim5, Choon-Ki Lee6, Bong-Soon Chang7.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The CaO-SiO2-P2O5-B2O3 glass ceramics spacer generates chemical bonding to adjacent bones with high mechanical stability to produce a union with the end plate, and ultimately stability.
PURPOSE: The authors aimed to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of CaO-SiO2-P2O5-B2O3 glass ceramics with a titanium cage that is widely used for posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) surgery in the clinical field. STUDY DESIGN/
SETTING: This is a prospective, stratified randomized, multicenter, single-blinded, comparator-controlled non-inferiority trial. PATIENT SAMPLE: The present study was conducted in four hospitals and enrolled a total of 86 patients between 30 and 80 years of age who required one-level PLIF due to severe spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, or huge disc herniation. OUTCOME MEASURES: The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36), and pain visual analog scale (VAS) were assessed before surgery and at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. The spinal fusion rate was assessed at 6 and 12 months after surgery.
METHODS: The spinal fusion rate and the area of fusion, subsidence of each CaO-SiO2-P2O5-B2O3 glass ceramics and titanium cage, and the extent of osteolysis were evaluated using a dynamic plain radiography and a three-dimensional computed tomography at 12 months after surgery. The present study was supported by BioAlpha, and some authors (JHL, C-KL, and B-SC) have stock ownership (<10,000 US dollars).
RESULTS: From the plain radiography results, the 6-month fusion rates for the bioactive glass ceramics group and the titanium group were 89.7% and 91.4%, respectively. In addition, the 12-month fusion rates based on CT scan were 89.7% and 91.2%, respectively, showing no significant difference. However, the bone fusion area directly attached to the end plate of either bioactive glass ceramics or the titanium cage was significantly higher in the bioactive glass ceramics group than in the titanium group. The ODI, SF-36, back pain, and lower limb pain in both groups significantly improved after surgery, with no significant differences between the groups. No significant differences between the two groups were observed in the extent of subsidence and osteolysis.
CONCLUSIONS: In lumbar posterior interbody fusion surgery, CaO-SiO2-P2O5-B2O3 glass ceramics spacer showed a similar fusion rates and clinical outcomes compared with titanium cage.
Copyright © 2016 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clinical trial; Computed tomography; Efficacy; Fusion rate; Glass ceramics; Oswestry Disability Index; Posterior lumbar interbody fusion; Prospective study; Safety; Titanium cage

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27498334     DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2016.07.531

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


  7 in total

1.  GEORG-SCHMORL-PRIZE OF THE GERMAN SPINE SOCIETY (DWG) 2016: Comparison of in vitro osteogenic potential of iliac crest and degenerative facet joint bone autografts for intervertebral fusion in lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Jeroen Geurts; Daniela Ramp; Stefan Schären; Cordula Netzer
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-03-21       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Comparison Between 3-Dimensional-Printed Titanium and Polyetheretherketone Cages: 1-Year Outcome After Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Interbody Fusion.

Authors:  Do-Yeon Kim; O-Hyuk Kwon; Jeong-Yoon Park
Journal:  Neurospine       Date:  2022-09-30

Review 3.  Biomaterials for Interbody Fusion in Bone Tissue Engineering.

Authors:  Han Zhang; Zhonghan Wang; Yang Wang; Zuhao Li; Bo Chao; Shixian Liu; Wangwang Luo; Jianhang Jiao; Minfei Wu
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-05-17

4.  Clinical outcomes for lumbar fusion using silicon nitride versus other biomaterials.

Authors:  Graham C Calvert; George VanBuren Huffmon; William M Rambo; Micah W Smith; Bryan J McEntire; B Sonny Bal
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-03

5.  Superiority Claims for Spinal Devices: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Authors:  S Raymond Golish; Michael W Groff; Ali Araghi; Jason A Inzana
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2019-06-07

6.  Can posterior stand-alone expandable cages safely restore lumbar lordosis? A minimum 5-year follow-up study.

Authors:  Seung-Kook Kim; Ogeil Mubarak Elbashier; Su-Chan Lee; Woo-Jin Choi
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2020-09-29       Impact factor: 2.359

7.  A Long-Term Follow-up, Multicenter, Comparative Study of the Radiologic, and Clinical Results Between a CaO-SiO2-P2O5-B2O3 Bioactive Glass Ceramics (BGS-7) Intervertebral Spacer and Titanium Cage in 1-Level Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Authors:  Jae Hyup Lee; Sun Ki Kim; Sung Shik Kang; Seung Jung Han; Choon-Ki Lee; Bong-Soon Chang
Journal:  Clin Spine Surg       Date:  2020-08       Impact factor: 1.723

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.