Literature DB >> 28315798

Bone Morphogenetic Proteins in Anterior Cervical Fusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Shayan Abdollah Zadegan1, Aidin Abedi1, Seyed Behnam Jazayeri1, Hirbod Nasiri Bonaki1, Seyed Behzad Jazayeri1, Alexander R Vaccaro2, Vafa Rahimi-Movaghar3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) have been commonly used as a graft substitute in spinal fusion. Although the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued a warning on life-threatening complications of recombinant human BMPs (rhBMPs) in cervical spine fusion in 2008, their off-label use has been continued. This investigation aimed to review the evidence for the use of rhBMP-2 and rhBMP-7 in anterior cervical spine fusions.
METHODS: A comprehensive search was performed through Ovid (MEDLINE), PubMed, and Embase. The risk of bias assessment was according to the recommended criteria by the Cochrane Back and Neck group and MINORS (Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies). A wide array of radiographic and clinical outcomes including the adverse events were collated.
RESULTS: Eighteen articles (1 randomized and 17 nonrandomized) were eligible for inclusion. The fusion rate was higher with use of rhBMP in most studies and our meta-analysis of the pooled data from 4782 patients confirmed this finding (odds ratio, 5.45; P < 0.00001). Altogether, the rhBMP and control groups were comparable in patient-reported outcomes. However, most studies tended to show a significantly higher incidence of overall complication rate, dysphagia/dysphonia, cervical swelling, readmission, wound complications, neurologic complications, and ossification.
CONCLUSIONS: Application of rhBMPs in cervical spine fusion yields a significantly higher fusion rate with similar patient-reported outcomes, yet increased risk of life-threatening complications. Thus, we do not recommend the use of rhBMP in anterior cervical fusions.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bone morphogenetic proteins; Cervical vertebrae; Intervertebral disc; Spinal fusion

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28315798     DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.02.098

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World Neurosurg        ISSN: 1878-8750            Impact factor:   2.104


  5 in total

1.  Structural Allograft Versus PEEK Implants in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Amit Jain; Majd Marrache; Andrew Harris; Varun Puvanesarajah; Brian J Neuman; Zorica Buser; Jeffrey C Wang; S Tim Yoon; Hans Jörg Meisel
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2019-10-25

2.  Exploratory meta-analysis on dose-related efficacy and complications of rhBMP-2 in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: 1,539,021 cases from 2003 to 2017 studies.

Authors:  Ya-Dan Wen; Wei-Min Jiang; Hui-Lin Yang; Jin-Hui Shi
Journal:  J Orthop Translat       Date:  2020-02-18       Impact factor: 5.191

3.  Comparing cellular bone matrices for posterolateral spinal fusion in a rat model.

Authors:  Cliff Lin; Nianli Zhang; Erik I Waldorff; Paolo Punsalan; David Wang; Eric Semler; James T Ryaby; Jung Yoo; Brian Johnstone
Journal:  JOR Spine       Date:  2020-03-15

4.  Ectopic Laryngeal Ossification after Bone Morphogenetic Protein-2.

Authors:  Kirsten Wong; Edward Damrose; Jennifer Long
Journal:  Surgeries (Basel)       Date:  2021-11-10

5.  Titanium versus polyetheretherketone versus structural allograft in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A systematic review.

Authors:  Jacob L Goldberg; Ross M Meaden; Ibrahim Hussain; Pravesh S Gadjradj; Danyal Quraishi; Fabian Sommer; Joseph A Carnevale; Branden Medary; Drew Wright; K Daniel Riew; Roger Hartl
Journal:  Brain Spine       Date:  2022-08-22
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.