Aims

Lumbar fusion is known to reduce the variation in pelvic tilt between standing and sitting. A flexible lumbo-pelvic unit increases the stability of total hip arthroplasty (THA) when seated by increasing anterior clearance and acetabular anteversion, thereby preventing impingement of the prosthesis. Lumbar fusion may eliminate this protective pelvic movement. The effect of lumbar fusion on the stability of total hip arthroplasty has not previously been investigated.

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

Introduction:. Several reports showed superior fusion rates, as high as 100%, using rhBMP-2 with ALIF cages. This has led to the widespread off-label use of rhBMP-2 in several other lumbar fusion procedures. There is paucity of reports analysing the clinic-radiological outcome of using rhBMP-2 to promote bone union in cases of symptomatic pseudoarthosis following lumbar spine fusion. Methods:. 52 consecutive patients who underwent revision spinal surgery for symptomatic pseudoarthosis utilizing rhBMP-2 between 2008 and 2013 were included in the study. Demographic, and surgical data were collected from medical records. Functional outcomes were recorded using the ODI. All patients had preoperative fine-cut CT scan to confirm pseudoarthosis. Postoperative CT-scan at 6 months was routinely done to confirm fusion. Results:. Average age at time of revision surgery was 54years (range 28–73). Average follow up was 3 years 5 months (range 2–5 years). Overall fusion rate of 92.3% (48/52) was achieved. The average ODI has improved from 56% preoperatively to 49% postoperatively. We had 1 infection case, and 5 complications related to metalwork. One case with neuronal complications was recorded. No rhBMP-2 related complications. There was no record of heterotopic bone formation in the spinal canal or the neuroforamen. Conclusion:. Recombinant BMP-2 is a safe and effective adjunct to revision lumbar spinal fusion surgery to alleviate back pain symptoms from pseudoarthosis. The limitations of the study include: retrospective review, lack of matched cohort utilising iliac crest bone graft, and relatively short follow-up

The August 2014 Spine Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: rhBMP complicates cervical spine surgery; posterior longitudinal ligament revisited; thoracolumbar posterior instrumentation without fusion in burst fractures; risk modelling for VTE events in spinal surgery; the consequences of dural tears in microdiscectomy; trends in revision spinal surgery; radiofrequency denervation likely effective in facet joint pain and hooks optimally biomechanically transition posterior instrumentation.

Using the United States Nationwide Inpatient Sample, we identified national trends in revision spinal fusion along with a comprehensive comparison of comorbidities, inpatient complications and surgical factors of revision spinal fusion compared to primary spinal fusion. In 2009, there were 410 158 primary spinal fusion discharges and 22 128 revision spinal fusion discharges. Between 2002 and 2009, primary fusion increased at a higher rate compared with revision fusion (56.4% vs 51.0%; p < 0.001). In 2009, the mean length of stay and hospital charges were higher for revision fusion discharges than for primary fusion discharges (4.2 days vs 3.8 days, p < 0.001; USD $91 909 vs. $87 161, p < 0.001). In 2009, recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) was used more in revision fusion than in primary fusion (39.6% vs 27.6%, p < 0.001), whereas interbody devices were used less in revision fusion (41.8% vs 56.6%, p < 0.001). . In the multivariable logistic regression model for all spinal fusions, depression (odds ratio (OR) 1.53, p < 0.001), psychotic disorders (OR 1.49, p < 0.001), deficiency anaemias (OR 1.35, p < 0.001) and smoking (OR 1.10, p = 0.006) had a greater chance of occurrence in revision spinal fusion discharges than in primary fusion discharges, adjusting for other variables. In terms of complications, after adjusting for all significant comorbidities, this study found that dural tears (OR 1.41; p < 0.001) and surgical site infections (OR 3.40; p < 0.001) had a greater chance of occurrence in revision spinal fusion discharges than in primary fusion discharges (p < 0.001). A p-value < 0.01 was considered significant in all final analyses. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:807–16

Introduction: morcelized defatted bone-Bank graft (MOD-B) has been employed in 249 patients for different diseases in Rizzoli Institute from 1998 to 2002. 82 hip revisions, 51 spine fusions, 50 osteolitic bone cavities, 47 non-unions). Good results obtained with MOD-B have been the reason for different researches of his properties like an antibiotic carrier and, in the same time, a particular new bone graft. Material and Methods:. MOD-B with antibiotic powder and PMMA Cylinders (A-MB-C) have been placed in saline solution and plasma for 4 weeks, compared with cylinders made with PMMA and antibiotic. The mechanical resistance of A-MB-C to compressive test has been performed subsequently. About biocompatibility, A-MB-C were implanted in sheep’s Ilium. After 3 moths an histologic evaluation has been performed. Results:. The MOD-B + antibiotic + PMMA have released the higher quantity of antibiotic for all the 4 weeks. The A-MB-C resistance has been of 13.6 MPa, the same resistance of cancellous bone in the man’s femur. The histological result with a fluoroscopic microscope has been an osteogenesis in the full section of the cylinders. Conclusions: morcelized defatted bone-Bank graft is an important opportunity to restore bone loss lesions but, with a septic situation, it is not so easy obtain good results. A very important goal would be to have a graft with good antibiotic deliver system, good mechanical compressive strength and the potential capacity to become new living bone

Despite progress in surgical methods, the clinical results of spine fusion are still not satisfactory, although success rate is certainly higher than in the past, some patients require multiple surgeries to treat a spinal disorder. There are many reasons for which a revision surgery may be necessary: for failure of spinal previous fusion, as pseudarthrosis, for junctional failure or for decompensation of previous fusion. This is a review of 54 patients who underwent revision spine fusion between ’96 and 2000: they were 20 males (37%) and 34 females (53%), in 9 (17%) cases was interested cervical segment, in 9 (17%) thoracic, in 10 (18%) thoracolumbar, in 26 (48%) lumbar; in 29 (54%) patients, previous fusion was performed for a fracture, in 23 (42%) for degenerative pathology (in 17 (31%) was made a postero-lateral fusion, in 4 (7%) cases postero-lumbar interbody fusion and in 2 (3%) cases anterior fusion), in 1 (2%) case for degenerative scoliosis and in 1 (2%) case for a tumour excision. Revision surgery had to be performed in 28 (52%) patients for a mechanical complication, in 14 (26%) for instability of device, in 7 (13%) for wound infection and in 5 (9%) for pseudoarthrosis. Revision procedures were in 37 (68%) cases a new spinal fusion (17 (31%) postero-lateral, 7 (13%) postero-lumbar interbody, 7 (13%) anterior fusion and in 6 (11%) cases both anterior in 7 (13%) removal of mechanical devices, in 7 (13%) cleaning of wound and in 3 (5%) elongation of devices. We have performed a clinical and radiological evaluation with al least 2 years of follow-up. From our analysis of results of the present study, it appears that the rates of improvement after a second operation is lower than that after an initial operation and the rates of complication are significantly higher. This is probably relates to the greater complexity of revision surgery, the more invasive nature of procedure and the longer duration. and posterior fusion)