Download PDF
J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg 2013; 74(06): 343-350
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1333420
Original Article
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial Comparing Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes between Stand-Alone Lateral Interbody Lumbar Fusion with either Silicate Calcium Phosphate or rh-BMP2

Luiz Pimenta
1   Department of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Instituto de Patologia de Coluna, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
2   Department of Neurosurgery, UCSD San Diego, California, United States
,
Luis Marchi
1   Department of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Instituto de Patologia de Coluna, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
Leonardo Oliveira
1   Department of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Instituto de Patologia de Coluna, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
Etevaldo Coutinho
1   Department of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Instituto de Patologia de Coluna, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
,
Rodrigo Amaral
1   Department of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Instituto de Patologia de Coluna, São Paulo, SP, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

09 May 2012

11 August 2012

Publication Date:
26 February 2013 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Object Iliac crest autograft has traditionally been considered the gold standard for lumbar spine fusion, though it is not without drawbacks related to harvesting site pain and other complications. Bone graft alternatives, such as recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 (rh-BMP2), are now widely used but also have unique risk profiles and substantially increase costs. The purpose of the current study was to compare the efficacy of rh-BMP2 and synthetic silicate calcium phosphate (SiCaP) as bone graft substitutes on fusion rates and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing single-level lumbar stand-alone extreme lateral interbody fusion (XLIF).

Methods A prospective, randomized, controlled, clinical, and radiographic study was performed at a single institution. Thirty patients with L4–L5 degenerative disc disease (DDD) were enrolled. Patients were randomized into one of two groups, 15 underwent lumbar single-level stand-alone XLIF using SiCaP, and 15 using rh-BMP2. Clinical and radiographic results were compared between the study groups. Pain (visual analogue scale) and disability (Oswestry disability index) were assessed preoperatively and at postoperative weeks 1 and 6 and postoperative months 3, 6, 12, 24, and 36. Radiographic evaluations were performed at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months. Neurological examinations and adverse events were recorded at each visit.

Results No intraoperative complications were observed in either treatment group, and clinical outcomes were similarly improved between bone graft substitutes from baseline to 36 months postoperative. Complications were transient hip flexion weakness (13%), insufficient indirect decompression (7%), subsidence (17%), excessive bone formation (4%), and adjacent segment disease (14%). Complication rates between the groups were similar, though with slightly more instances of subsidence in the SiCaP group and higher rates of excessive bone formation and adjacent segment disease in the rh-BMP2 group. Rates of fusion at different time points were different between the groups, with the SiCaP patients progressing more slowly toward solid fusion. However, at 36 months, 100% of patients undergoing XLIF achieved solid fusion.

Conclusions In stand-alone XLIF, SiCaP and rhBMP-2 bone graft substitutes both resulted in complete long-term fusion. rhBMP-2, however, seemed to result in more rapid early postoperative fusion, though with one instance of excessive bone formation in one patient that required subsequent surgical intervention.

Keywords

biologics - bone graft - lateral access - XLIF - bmp
 

  • References

  • 1 Deluzio KJ, Lucio JC, Rodgers WB. Value and cost in less invasive spinal fusion surgery: lessons from a community hospital. SAS Journal 2010; 4: 37-40
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Wang MY, Cummock MD, Yu Y, Trivedi RA. An analysis of the differences in the acute hospitalization charges following minimally invasive versus open posterior lumbar interbody fusion. J Neurosurg Spine 2010; 12: 694-699
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Rodgers WB, Gerber EJ, Patterson J. Intraoperative and early postoperative complications in extreme lateral interbody fusion: an analysis of 600 cases. Spine 2011; 36: 26-32
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Oliveira L, Marchi L, Coutinho E, Pimenta L. A radiographic assessment of the ability of the extreme lateral interbody fusion procedure to indirectly decompress the neural elements. Spine 2010; 35 (26, Suppl) S331-S337
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Amaral R, Marchi L, Oliveira L, Coutinho T, Castro C, Coutinho E , et al. Minimally invasive lateral alternative for thoracolumbar interbody fusion. Coluna/Columna 2011; 10: 239-243
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Pimenta L, Oliveira L, Schaffa T, Coutinho E, Marchi L. Lumbar total disc replacement from an extreme lateral approach: clinical experience with a minimum of 2 years' follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine 2011; 14: 38-45
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Ozgur BM, Agarwal V, Nail E, Pimenta L. Two-year clinical and radiographic success of minimally invasive lateral transpsoas approach for the treatment of degenerative lumbar conditions. SAS Journal 2010; 4: 41-46
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Marchi L, Oliveira L, Amaral R , et al. Anterior elongation as a minimally invasive alternative for sagittal imbalance—a case series. HSS J 2012; 8: 122-127
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Dakwar E, Cardona RF, Smith DA, Uribe JS. Early outcomes and safety of the minimally invasive, lateral retroperitoneal transpsoas approach for adult degenerative scoliosis. Neurosurg Focus 2010; 28: E8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Smith WD, Dakwar E, Le TV, Christian G, Serrano S, Uribe JS. Minimally invasive surgery for traumatic spinal pathologies: a mini-open, lateral approach in the thoracic and lumbar spine. Spine 2010; 35 (26, Suppl) S338-S346
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Deviren V, Kuelling FA, Poulter G, Pekmezci M. Minimal invasive anterolateral transthoracic transpleural approach: a novel technique for thoracic disc herniation. A review of the literature, description of a new surgical technique and experience with first 12 consecutive patients. J Spinal Disord Tech 2011; 24: E40-E48
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Uribe JS, Smith WD, Pimenta L , et al. Minimally invasive lateral approach for symptomatic thoracic disc herniation: initial multicenter clinical experience. J Neurosurg Spine 2012; 16: 264-279
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Uribe JS, Dakwar E, Le TV, Christian G, Serrano S, Smith WD. Minimally invasive surgery treatment for thoracic spine tumor removal: a mini-open, lateral approach. Spine 2010; 35 (26, Suppl) S347-S354
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Sasso RC, LeHuec JC, Shaffrey C. Spine Interbody Research Group. Iliac crest bone graft donor site pain after anterior lumbar interbody fusion: a prospective patient satisfaction outcome assessment. J Spinal Disord Tech 2005; 18 (Suppl): S77-S81
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Kim DH, Rhim R, Li L , et al. Prospective study of iliac crest bone graft harvest site pain and morbidity. Spine J 2009; 9: 886-892
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Arrington ED, Smith WJ, Chambers HG, Bucknell AL, Davino NA. Complications of iliac crest bone graft harvesting. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1996; 300-309
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Blattert TR, Delling G, Weckbach A. Evaluation of an injectable calcium phosphate cement as an autograft substitute for transpedicular lumbar interbody fusion: a controlled, prospective study in the sheep model. Eur Spine J 2003; 12: 216-223
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Guimarães KB, Vasconcelos BC, Limeira Júnior FdeA, Sousa FB, Andrade ES, Vasconcellos RJ. Histomorphometric evaluation of calcium phosphate bone grafts on bone repair. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol 2011; 77: 447-454
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Winge MI, Reikerås O, Røkkum M. Calcium phosphate bone cement: a possible alternative to autologous bone graft. A radiological and biomechanical comparison in rat tibial bone. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2011; 131: 1035-1041
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Aberg J, Pankotai E, Hulsart Billström G, Weszl M, Larsson S, Forster-Horváth C , et al. In vivo evaluation of an injectable premixed radiopaque calcium phosphate cement. Int J Biomater 2011; 2011: 232574
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Jenis LG, Banco RJ. Efficacy of silicate-substituted calcium phosphate ceramic in posterolateral instrumented lumbar fusion. Spine 2010; 35: E1058-E1063
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Kerr III EJ, Jawahar A, Wooten T, Kay S, Cavanaugh DA, Nunley PD. The use of osteo-conductive stem-cells allograft in lumbar interbody fusion procedures: an alternative to recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein. J Surg Orthop Adv 2011; 20: 193-197
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Wang JC. Gene therapy for spinal fusion. Spine J 2011; 11: 557-559
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Rubery PT. Enhancing allograft bone healing through gene therapy. Spine 2010; 35: 1640-1647
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Lee KJH, Roper JG, Wang JC. Demineralized bone matrix and spinal arthrodesis. Spine J 2005; 5 (6, Suppl) 217S-223S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Agarwal R, Williams K, Umscheid CA, Welch WC. Osteoinductive bone graft substitutes for lumbar fusion: a systematic review. J Neurosurg Spine 2009; 11: 729-740
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Ozgur BM, Aryan HE, Pimenta L, Taylor WR. Extreme Lateral Interbody Fusion (XLIF): a novel surgical technique for anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Spine J 2006; 6: 435-443
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Toribatake Y, Hutton WC, Tomita K, Boden SD. Vascularization of the fusion mass in a posterolateral intertransverse process fusion. Spine 1998; 23: 1149-1154
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Boden SD. The ABCs of BMPs. Orthop Nurs 2005; 24: 49-52 , quiz 53–54
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Feiertag MA, Boden SD, Schimandle JH, Norman JT. A rabbit model for nonunion of lumbar intertransverse process spine arthrodesis. Spine 1996; 21: 27-31
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Epstein NE. Pros, cons, and costs of INFUSE in spinal surgery. Surg Neurol Int 2011; 2: 10
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Ackerman SJ, Mafilios MS, Polly Jr DW. Economic evaluation of bone morphogenetic protein versus autogenous iliac crest bone graft in single-level anterior lumbar fusion: an evidence-based modeling approach. Spine 2002; 27 (16) (Suppl. 01) S94-S99
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Branch Jr CL. Physican-directed (off-label) use of recombinant bone morphogenic protein-2: let us do it well!. Spine J 2011; 11: 469-470
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Vaidya R, Sethi A, Bartol S, Jacobson M, Coe C, Craig JG. Complications in the use of rhBMP-2 in PEEK cages for interbody spinal fusions. J Spinal Disord Tech 2008; 21: 557-562
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Owens K, Glassman SD, Howard JM, Djurasovic M, Witten JL, Carreon LY. Perioperative complications with rhBMP-2 in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion. Eur Spine J 2011; 20: 612-617
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Mroz TE, Wang JC, Hashimoto R, Norvell DC. Complications related to osteobiologics use in spine surgery: a systematic review. Spine 2010; 35 (9, Suppl) S86-S104
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Carragee EJ, Hurwitz EL, Weiner BK. A critical review of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 trials in spinal surgery: emerging safety concerns and lessons learned. Spine J 2011; 11: 471-491
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Glassman SD, Gum JL, Crawford III CH, Shields CB, Carreon LY. Complications with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 in posterolateral spine fusion associated with a dural tear. Spine J 2011; 11: 522-526
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Hing KA, Wilson LF, Buckland T. Comparative performance of three ceramic bone graft substitutes. Spine J 2007; 7: 475-490
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Guth K, Buckland T, Hing KA. Silicon dissolution from microporous silicon substituted hydroxyapatite and its effect on osteoblast behaviour. Key Eng Mater 2006; 309–311: 117-120
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Wheeler DL, Jenis LG, Kovach ME, Marini J, Turner AS. Efficacy of silicated calcium phosphate graft in posterolateral lumbar fusion in sheep. Spine J 2007; 7: 308-317
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Billinghurst J, Akbarnia BA. Extreme lateral interbody fusion - XLIF. Curr Orthop Pract 2009; 20: 238-251
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Cappuccino A, Cornwall GB, Turner AWL , et al. Biomechanical analysis and review of lateral lumbar fusion constructs. Spine 2010; 35 (26, Suppl) S361-S367
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Rodgers WB, Gerber EJ, Rodgers JA. Lumbar fusion in octogenarians: the promise of minimally invasive surgery. Spine 2010; 35 (26, Suppl) S355-S360
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Tormenti MJ, Maserati MB, Bonfield CM, Okonkwo DO, Kanter AS. Complications and radiographic correction in adult scoliosis following combined transpsoas extreme lateral interbody fusion and posterior pedicle screw instrumentation. Neurosurg Focus 2010; 28: E7
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Marchi L, Abdala N, Oliveira L, Amaral R, Coutinho E, Pimenta L. Stand-alone lateral interbody fusion for the treatment of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis. The Scientific World Journal 2012; 2012: 456346
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Marchi L, Nitamar A, Oliveira L, Coutinho E, Pimenta L. Radiological and clinical evaluation of cage subsidence following standalone lateral interbody fusion. Submitted 2012
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Choi JY, Sung KH. Subsidence after anterior lumbar interbody fusion using paired stand-alone rectangular cages. Eur Spine J 2006; 15: 16-22
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Oliveira L, Marchi L, Coutinho E, Pimenta L. The subsidence rate in XLIF osteoporotic patients in standalone procedures. Spine J 2010; 10: S51-S52
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Le TV, Baaj AA, Dakwar E , et al. Subsidence of PEEK intervertebral cages in minimally invasive lateral retroperitoneal transpsoas lumbar interbody fusion. Spine 2012; 37: 1268-1273
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Rodgers WB, Gerber EJ, Patterson JR. Fusion after minimally disruptive anterior lumbar interbody fusion: analysis of extreme lateral interbody fusion by computed tomography. SAS Journal 2010; 4: 63-66
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Glassman SD, Carreon LY, Djurasovic M , et al. RhBMP-2 versus iliac crest bone graft for lumbar spine fusion: a randomized, controlled trial in patients over sixty years of age. Spine 2008; 33: 2843-2849
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Mummaneni PV, Pan J, Haid RW, Rodts GE. Contribution of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 to the rapid creation of interbody fusion when used in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a preliminary report. Invited submission from the Joint Section Meeting on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves, March 2004. J Neurosurg Spine 2004; 1: 19-23
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Burkus JK, Heim SE, Gornet MF, Zdeblick TA. Is INFUSE bone graft superior to autograft bone? An integrated analysis of clinical trials using the LT-CAGE lumbar tapered fusion device. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003; 16: 113-122
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Karikari IO, Nimjee SM, Hardin CA , et al. Extreme lateral interbody fusion approach for isolated thoracic and thoracolumbar spine diseases: initial clinical experience and early outcomes. J Spinal Disord Tech 2011; 24: 368-375
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Hyde J, Seits M. Clinical experience, outcomes, and learning curve following XLIF for lumbar degenerative conditions. World Spinal Column J 2011; 2: 21-26
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Oliveira L, Marchi L, Coutinho E, Abdala N, Pimenta L. The use of rh-BMP2 in standalone eXtreme Lateral Interbody Fusion (XLIF®): clinical and radiological results after 24 months follow-up. World Spinal Column J 2010; 1: 19-25
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Wang MY, Mummaneni PV. Minimally invasive surgery for thoracolumbar spinal deformity: Initial clinical experience with clinical and radiographic outcomes. Neurosurg Focus 2010; 28: 1-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Anand N, Rosemann R, Khalsa B, Baron EM. Mid-term to long-term clinical and functional outcomes of minimally invasive correction and fusion for adults with scoliosis. Neurosurg Focus 2010; 28: E6
    PubMedGoogle Scholar