Molecular methods of enhancing lumbar spine fusion

被引:37
|
作者
Sheehan, JP
Kallmes, DF
Sheehan, JM
Jane, JA
Fergus, AH
diPierro, CG
Simmons, NE
Makel, DD
Helm, GA
机构
[1] UNIV VIRGINIA, DEPT RADIOL, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22908 USA
[2] UNIV VIRGINIA, DEPT BIOMED ENGN, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22908 USA
[3] UNIV VIRGINIA, DEPT BIOPHYS, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22908 USA
关键词
bone morphogenetic protein; osteoconduction; osteoinduction; spinal fusion;
D O I
10.1097/00006123-199609000-00023
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
OBJECTIVE: An optimal method for spinal fusion would induce rapid growth of bone via an osteoconductive and osteoinductive implant. This study examines the spinal fusion enhancement potential of some osteoconductive and osteoinductive biomaterials. METHODS: Four similar canines received unilateral posterolateral fusions on the left side at T13-L1 and L4-L5 and on the right side at L2-L3 and L6-L7. The experiments were grouped as follows: Group A, autogenous bone harvested from the iliac crest; Group B, autogenous bone and collagen; Group C, no implant; and Group D, autogenous bone, collagen, and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2. Radiographic assessment, three-dimensional computed tomographic volumetric analysis, and biomechanical testing were performed at each level. RESULTS: For Groups A and B, the fusions demonstrated moderate bone formation at 6 and 12 weeks postoperatively. Group D fusions exhibited earlier and more dramatic increases in volume and radiodensity and eventually were comparable in size to the vertebral bodies. Average fusion volumes computed from three-dimensional computed tomographic analysis were: Group A = 1.243 cc, Group B = 0.900 cc, Group C = 0.000 cc, and Group D = 6.668 cc (P = 0.003 compared to Group A). Group D exhibited flexion and extension biomechanical properties much greater than controls. The addition of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 consistently yielded the strongest fused segments and, on average, enhanced extension stiffness by 626% and flexion stiffness by 1120% over controls. CONCLUSION: The most advantageous spinal fusion implant matrix consisted of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2, autogenous bone, and collagen. Future investigators, however, need to examine the appropriate quantities of the individual components and clarify the efficacy of the matrix for the various types of spinal fusion approaches.
引用
收藏
页码:548 / 554
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Molecular methods of enhancing lumbar spine fusion - Comment
    McCormick, PC
    NEUROSURGERY, 1996, 39 (03) : 554 - 554
  • [2] Lumbar spine fusion
    Johnson, RG
    ORTHOPEDICS, 2003, 26 (08) : 756 - +
  • [3] Lumbar spine fusion - Reply
    Glassman, SD
    ORTHOPEDICS, 2003, 26 (08) : 812 - 812
  • [4] Lumbar spine fusion - Preface
    Batjer, HH
    Loftus, CM
    TECHNIQUES IN NEUROSURGERY, 1998, 4 (03): : 195 - 195
  • [5] PERCUTANEOUS LUMBAR SPINE FUSION
    LEU, H
    HAUSER, R
    SCHREIBER, A
    ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA SCANDINAVICA, 1993, 64 : 116 - 119
  • [6] Imaging of Lumbar Spine Fusion
    Zampolin, Richard
    Erdfarb, Amichai
    Miller, Todd
    NEUROIMAGING CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2014, 24 (02) : 269 - +
  • [7] Endoscopic fusion of the lumbar spine
    Arnold, W
    Gastinger, I
    Krause, W
    Schilling, HW
    Koch, A
    Grundei, H
    ZENTRALBLATT FUR CHIRURGIE, 1997, 122 (11): : 1040 - 1045
  • [8] LUMBAR SPINE FUSION - CONCLUSIONS
    WILLNER, S
    ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA SCANDINAVICA, 1993, 64 : 123 - 124
  • [9] Radiographic appearance of the lumbar spine after lumbar fusion
    Viscomi, CM
    Rathmell, JP
    Monsey, RD
    REGIONAL ANESTHESIA AND PAIN MEDICINE, 2000, 25 (03) : 286 - 290
  • [10] Clinical outcomes of 3 fusion methods through the posterior approach in the lumbar spine
    Kim, Ki-Tack
    Lee, Sang-Hun
    Lee, Young-Ho
    Bae, Sung-Chul
    Suk, Kyung-Soo
    SPINE, 2006, 31 (12) : 1351 - 1357