ArticleSpine2011
Outcomes for single-level lumbar fusion: the role of bone morphogenetic protein.
Article in Spine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is Bone Morphogenetic Protein the new Gold Standard? A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of Bone Morphogenetic Protein vs Autologous Iliac Crest Bone Graft Use in Spinal Fusion.Orthopedic reviews · 2026Article
- FDA-approved bone grafts and bone graft substitute devices in bone regeneration.Materials science & engineering. C, Materials for biological applications · 2021Review
- Research Progress of the Role of Anthocyanins on Bone Regeneration.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Review
- Comparative Efficacy of Commonly Available Human Bone Graft Substitutes as Tested for Posterolateral Fusion in an Athymic Rat Model.International journal of spine surgery · 2019Article
- A Review of the Clinical Side Effects of Bone Morphogenetic Protein-2.Tissue engineering. Part B, Reviews · 2016Review
- Pain and disability following first-time lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative disorders: a systematic review protocol.Systematic reviews · 2016Article
- Evaluation of a novel tool for bone graft delivery in minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2016Article
- Complications, revision fusions, readmissions, and utilization over a 1-year period after bone morphogenetic protein use during primary cervical spine fusions.The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society · 2014Article
- Current status of bone graft options for anterior interbody fusion of the cervical and lumbar spine.Neurosurgical review · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
designRetrospective analysis of a population-based insurance claims data set.
objectiveTo determine the risk of repeat fusion and total costs associated with bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) use in single-level lumbar fusion for degenerative spinal disease. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The use of BMP has been proposed to reduce overall costs of spinal fusion through prevention of repeat fusion procedures. Although radiographic fusion rates associated with BMP use have been examined in clinical trials, few data exist regarding outcomes associated with BMP use in the general population.
methodsUsing the MarketScan claims data set, 15,862 patients that underwent single-level lumbar fusion from 2003 to 2007 for degenerative disease were identified. Propensity scores were used to match 2372 patients who underwent fusion with BMP to patients who underwent fusion without BMP. Logistic regression models, Kaplan-Meier estimates, and Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine risk of repeat fusion, length of stay, and 30-day readmission by BMP use. Cost comparisons were evaluated with linear regression models using logarithmic transformed data.
resultsAt 1 year from surgery, BMP was associated with a 1.1% absolute decrease in the risk of repeat fusion (2.3% with BMP vs. 3.4% without BMP, P = 0.03) and an odds ratio for repeat fusion of 0.66 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.47-0.94) after multivariate adjustment. BMP was also associated with a decreased hazard ratio for long-term repeat fusion (adjusted hazards ratio = 0.74, 95% CI = 0.58-0.93). Cost analysis indicated that BMP was associated with initial increased costs for the surgical procedure (13.9% adjusted increase, 95% CI = 9.9%-17.9%) as well as total 1-year costs (10.1% adjusted increase, 95% CI = 6.2%-14.0%).
conclusionAt 1 year, BMP use was associated with a decreased risk of repeat fusion but also increased health care costs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.