Efficacy and Safety of Osteobiologics for Lumbar Spinal Fusion: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Luca Ambrosio,Jordy Schol,Shota Tamagawa,Sathish Muthu,Daisuke Sakai,Rocco Papalia,Gianluca Vadalà,Vincenzo Denaro
{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Osteobiologics for Lumbar Spinal Fusion: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Luca Ambrosio,Jordy Schol,Shota Tamagawa,Sathish Muthu,Daisuke Sakai,Rocco Papalia,Gianluca Vadalà,Vincenzo Denaro","doi":"10.2106/jbjs.24.01205","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nLumbar spinal fusion (LSF) is a common surgical procedure for treating lumbar degenerative conditions. The use of osteobiologics to enhance fusion has emerged as a promising alternative to address the limitations of autologous iliac crest bone graft (AICBG), but their comparative efficacy and safety remain unclear. This systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to assess the fusion rates, safety profiles, and clinical outcomes of the use of osteobiologics in LSF.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nPubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different osteobiologics to AICBG in LSF. Data on fusion rates, complications, pain, disability, blood loss, operative time, and length of stay (LOS) were extracted. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias-2 tool, and the certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE framework. The NMA was performed using a frequentist random-effects model to compare the efficacy and safety of various osteobiologics, along with associated perioperative and clinical outcomes.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nForty-three RCTs including a total of 3,823 patients were identified. The use of rhBMP-2 (recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2) significantly improved fusion rates (odds ratio [OR]: 3.71; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.59 to 5.32; p < 0.0001) and reduced complications (OR: 0.30; 95% CI: 0.13 to 0.68; p < 0.0001) compared with AICBG, with moderate certainty of the evidence. Other osteobiologics, including ABM/P-15 (anorganic bone matrix/15-amino acid peptide fragment) and allograft, demonstrated reduced complication rates, although the quality of the evidence was low to very low. No significant differences were observed for pain, disability, or LOS. The use of rhBMP-2, autologous local bone, and silicate-substituted calcium phosphate was associated with decreased operative time, with rhBMP-2 additionally associated with lower intraoperative blood loss.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nUse of rhBMP-2 was associated with significantly higher fusion and lower complication rates compared with AICBG, as well as decreased operative time and blood loss. Other osteobiologics may also offer benefits, but the supporting evidence is low-quality and limited by the notable underrepresentation of these materials in the published literature.\r\n\r\nLEVEL OF EVIDENCE\r\nTherapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.","PeriodicalId":22625,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.24.01205","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND Lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) is a common surgical procedure for treating lumbar degenerative conditions. The use of osteobiologics to enhance fusion has emerged as a promising alternative to address the limitations of autologous iliac crest bone graft (AICBG), but their comparative efficacy and safety remain unclear. This systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to assess the fusion rates, safety profiles, and clinical outcomes of the use of osteobiologics in LSF. METHODS PubMed/MEDLINE and Scopus databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different osteobiologics to AICBG in LSF. Data on fusion rates, complications, pain, disability, blood loss, operative time, and length of stay (LOS) were extracted. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias-2 tool, and the certainty of evidence was assessed using the GRADE framework. The NMA was performed using a frequentist random-effects model to compare the efficacy and safety of various osteobiologics, along with associated perioperative and clinical outcomes. RESULTS Forty-three RCTs including a total of 3,823 patients were identified. The use of rhBMP-2 (recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2) significantly improved fusion rates (odds ratio [OR]: 3.71; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.59 to 5.32; p < 0.0001) and reduced complications (OR: 0.30; 95% CI: 0.13 to 0.68; p < 0.0001) compared with AICBG, with moderate certainty of the evidence. Other osteobiologics, including ABM/P-15 (anorganic bone matrix/15-amino acid peptide fragment) and allograft, demonstrated reduced complication rates, although the quality of the evidence was low to very low. No significant differences were observed for pain, disability, or LOS. The use of rhBMP-2, autologous local bone, and silicate-substituted calcium phosphate was associated with decreased operative time, with rhBMP-2 additionally associated with lower intraoperative blood loss. CONCLUSIONS Use of rhBMP-2 was associated with significantly higher fusion and lower complication rates compared with AICBG, as well as decreased operative time and blood loss. Other osteobiologics may also offer benefits, but the supporting evidence is low-quality and limited by the notable underrepresentation of these materials in the published literature. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
骨生物学治疗腰椎融合术的疗效和安全性:系统综述和网络荟萃分析。
背景:腰椎融合术(LSF)是治疗腰椎退行性疾病的常用外科手术。使用骨生物学增强融合已成为解决自体髂骨移植物(AICBG)局限性的一种有希望的替代方法,但其相对疗效和安全性尚不清楚。本系统综述和网络荟萃分析(NMA)旨在评估骨生物学在LSF中使用的融合率、安全性和临床结果。方法检索spubmed /MEDLINE和Scopus数据库,比较不同骨生物学制剂与LSF中AICBG的随机对照试验(rct)。提取融合率、并发症、疼痛、残疾、出血量、手术时间和住院时间(LOS)的数据。使用Cochrane risk of bias -2工具评估偏倚风险,使用GRADE框架评估证据的确定性。NMA采用频率随机效应模型来比较各种骨生物制剂的疗效和安全性,以及相关的围手术期和临床结果。结果共纳入43项随机对照试验,共3823例患者。使用重组人骨形态发生蛋白-2 (rhBMP-2)显著提高融合率(优势比[OR]: 3.71;95%置信区间[CI]: 2.59 ~ 5.32;p < 0.0001),并发症减少(OR: 0.30;95% CI: 0.13 ~ 0.68;p < 0.0001)与AICBG相比,证据的确定性中等。其他骨生物制剂,包括ABM/P-15(无机骨基质/15-氨基酸肽片段)和同种异体移植物,显示并发症发生率降低,尽管证据的质量很低或非常低。在疼痛、残疾或LOS方面没有观察到显著差异。使用rhBMP-2、自体局部骨和硅酸盐替代磷酸钙与缩短手术时间相关,rhBMP-2还与降低术中出血量相关。结论与AICBG相比,使用rhBMP-2可显著提高融合率,降低并发症发生率,减少手术时间和出血量。其他骨生物学材料也可能提供益处,但支持证据质量低,并且由于这些材料在已发表文献中的代表性明显不足而受到限制。证据级别:治疗性i级。参见《作者说明》获得证据级别的完整描述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信