Aims. People with severe, persistent low back pain (LBP) may be offered lumbar spine fusion surgery if they have had insufficient benefit from recommended non-surgical treatments. However, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) 2016 guidelines recommended not offering spinal fusion surgery for adults with LBP, except as part of a randomized clinical trial. This survey aims to describe UK clinicians’ views about the suitability of patients for such a future trial, along with their views regarding equipoise for randomizing patients in a future clinical trial comparing lumbar spine fusion surgery to best conservative care (BCC; the FORENSIC-UK trial). Methods. An online cross-sectional survey was piloted by the multidisciplinary research team, then shared with clinical professional groups in the UK who are involved in the management of adults with severe, persistent LBP. The survey had seven sections that covered the demographic details of the clinician, five hypothetical case vignettes of patients with varying presentations, a series of questions regarding the preferred management, and whether or not each clinician would be willing to recruit the example patients into future clinical trials. Results. There were 72 respondents, with a response rate of 9.0%. They comprised 39 orthopaedic spine surgeons, 17 neurosurgeons, one pain specialist, and 15 allied health professionals. Most respondents (n = 61,84.7%) chose conservative care as their first-choice management option for all five case vignettes. Over 50% of respondents reported willingness to randomize three of the five cases to either surgery or BCC, indicating a willingness to participate in the future randomized trial. From the respondents, transforaminal interbody fusion was the preferred approach for spinal fusion (n = 19, 36.4%), and the preferred method of BCC was a combined programme of physical and psychological therapy (n = 35, 48.5%). Conclusion. This survey demonstrates that there is uncertainty about the role of lumbar spine fusion surgery and BCC for a range of example patients with severe, persistent LBP in the UK. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(7):612–620

Aims. Psychoeducative prehabilitation to optimize surgical outcomes is relatively novel in spinal fusion surgery and, like most rehabilitation treatments, they are rarely well specified. Spinal fusion patients experience anxieties perioperatively about pain and immobility, which might prolong hospital length of stay (LOS). The aim of this prospective cohort study was to determine if a Preoperative Spinal Education (POSE) programme, specified using the Rehabilitation Treatment Specification System (RTSS) and designed to normalize expectations and reduce anxieties, was safe and reduced LOS. Methods. POSE was offered to 150 prospective patients over ten months (December 2018 to November 2019) Some chose to attend (Attend-POSE) and some did not attend (DNA-POSE). A third independent retrospective group of 150 patients (mean age 57.9 years (SD 14.8), 50.6% female) received surgery prior to POSE (pre-POSE). POSE consisted of an in-person 60-minute education with accompanying literature, specified using the RTSS as psychoeducative treatment components designed to optimize cognitive/affective representations of thoughts/feelings, and normalize anxieties about surgery and its aftermath. Across-group age, sex, median LOS, perioperative complications, and readmission rates were assessed using appropriate statistical tests. Results. In all, 65 (43%) patients (mean age 57.4 years (SD 18.2), 58.8% female) comprised the Attend-POSE, and 85 (57%) DNA-POSE (mean age 54.9 years (SD 15.8), 65.8% female). There were no significant between-group differences in age, sex, surgery type, complications, or readmission rates. Median LOS was statistically different across Pre-POSE (5 days ((interquartile range (IQR) 3 to 7)), Attend-POSE (3 (2 to 5)), and DNA-POSE (4 (3 to 7)), (p = 0.014). Pairwise comparisons showed statistically significant differences between Pre-POSE and Attend-POSE LOS (p = 0.011), but not between any other group comparison. In the Attend-POSE group, there was significant change toward greater surgical preparation, procedural familiarity, and less anxiety. Conclusion. POSE was associated with a significant reduction in LOS for patients undergoing spinal fusion surgery. Patients reported being better prepared for, more familiar, and less anxious about their surgery. POSE did not affect complication or readmission rates, meaning its inclusion was safe. However, uptake (43%) was disappointing and future work should explore potential barriers and challenges to attending POSE. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(2):135–144

Objectives. We performed a systematic review of the literature to determine the safety and efficacy of bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) compared with bone graft when used specifically for revision spinal fusion surgery secondary to pseudarthrosis. Methods. The MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases were searched using defined search terms. The primary outcome measure was spinal fusion, assessed as success or failure in accordance with radiograph, MRI or CT scan review at 24-month follow-up. The secondary outcome measure was time to fusion. Results. A total of six studies (three prospective and three retrospective) reporting on the use of BMP2 met the inclusion criteria (203 patients). Of these, four provided a comparison of BMP2 and bone graft whereas the other two solely investigated the use of BMP2. The primary outcome was seen in 92.3% (108/117) of patients following surgery with BMP2. Although none of the studies showed superiority of BMP2 to bone graft for fusion, its use was associated with a statistically quicker time to achieving fusion. BMP2 did not appear to increase the risk of complication. Conclusion. The use of BMP2 is both safe and effective within the revision setting, ideally in cases where bone graft is unavailable or undesirable. Further research is required to define its optimum role. Cite this article: Mr P. Bodalia. Effectiveness and safety of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 for adults with lumbar spine pseudarthrosis following spinal fusion surgery: A systematic review. Bone Joint Res 2016;5:145–152. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.54.2000418

Aims

Several artificial bone grafts have been developed but fail to achieve anticipated osteogenesis due to their insufficient neovascularization capacity and periosteum support. This study aimed to develop a vascularized bone-periosteum construct (VBPC) to provide better angiogenesis and osteogenesis for bone regeneration.

Objectives

The aim of this systematic literature review was to assess the clinical level of evidence of commercially available demineralised bone matrix (DBM) products for their use in trauma and orthopaedic related surgery.

Objectives

Interleukin 18 (IL-18) is a regulatory cytokine that degrades the disc matrix. Bone morphogenetic protein-2 (BMP-2) stimulates synthesis of the disc extracellular matrix. However, the combined effects of BMP-2 and IL-18 on human intervertebral disc degeneration have not previously been reported. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of the anabolic cytokine BMP-2 and the catabolic cytokine IL-18 on human nucleus pulposus (NP) and annulus fibrosus (AF) cells and, therefore, to identify potential therapeutic and clinical benefits of recombinant human (rh)BMP-2 in intervertebral disc degeneration.