ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2013
Allogeneic morphogenetic protein vs. recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 in lumbar interbody fusion procedures: a radiographic and economic analysis.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical and radiographic outcomes of three-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion using allograft cellular bone matrix.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- A novel growth factor bioavailability-enhanced allograft for use in craniomaxillofacial bone regeneration.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Integrating Artificial Intelligence in Orthopedic Care: Advancements in Bone Care and Future Directions.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Use of osteogenic bone matrix in patients with traumatic long bone defects: An open label, single center study.Journal of orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion With rhBMP-2 can Achieve High Fusion Rates in Adult Spine Deformity Surgeries.Global spine journal · 2024Article
- Bone Grafting Options for Single-Level TLIF: So Many Options, What Is the Evidence?International journal of spine surgery · 2023Article
- Scaffold Guided Bone Regeneration for the Treatment of Large Segmental Defects in Long Bones.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Commercial Bone Grafts Claimed as an Alternative to Autografts: Current Trends for Clinical Applications in Orthopaedics.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Allografts and Spinal Fusion.International journal of spine surgery · 2021Article
- The Few Who Made It: Commercially and Clinically Successful Innovative Bone Grafts.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Review
- Nonunion of Transpsoas Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using an Allograft: Clinical Assessment and Risk Factors.Spine surgery and related research · 2018Article
- Bone regeneration strategies: Engineered scaffolds, bioactive molecules and stem cells current stage and future perspectives.Biomaterials · 2018Review
- Preliminary Results of Bioactive Amniotic Suspension with Allograft for Achieving One and Two-Level Lumbar Interbody Fusion.International journal of spine surgery · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSince the introduction of rhBMP-2 (Infuse) in 2002, surgeons have had an alternative substitute to autograft and its related donor site morbidity. Recently, the prevalence of reported adverse events and complications related to the use of rhBMP-2 has raised many ethical and legal concerns for surgeons. Additionally, the cost and decreasing reimbursement landscape of rhBMP-2 use have required identification of a viable alternative. Osteo allogeneic morphogenetic protein (OsteoAMP) is a commercially available allograft-derived growth factor rich in osteoinductive, angiogenic, and mitogenic proteins. This study compares the radiographic fusion outcomes between rhBMP-2 and OsteoAMP allogeneic morphogenetic protein in lumbar interbody fusion spine procedures.
methodsThree hundred twenty-one (321) patients from three centers underwent a transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) or lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) procedure and were assessed by an independent radiologist for fusion and radiographically evident complications. The independent radiologist was blinded to the intervention, product, and surgeon information. Two hundred and twenty-six (226) patients received OsteoAMP with autologous local bone, while ninety-five (95) patients received Infuse with autologous local bone. Patients underwent radiographs (x-ray and/or CT) at standard postoperative follow-up intervals of approximately 1, 3, 6, 12, and 18 months. Fusion was defined as radiographic evidence of bridging across endplates, or bridging from endplates to interspace disc plugs. Osteobiologic surgical supply costs were also analyzed to ascertain cost differences between OsteoAMP and rhBMP-2.
resultsOsteoAMP produced higher rates of fusion at 6, 12, and 18 months (p ≤ 0.01). The time required for OsteoAMP to achieve fusion was approximately 40% less than rhBMP-2 with approximately 70% fewer complications. Osteobiologic supply costs were 80.5% lower for OsteoAMP patients (73.7% lower per level) than for rhBMP-2.
conclusionsResults of this study indicate that OsteoAMP is a viable alternative to rhBMP-2 both clinically and economically when used in TLIF and LLIF spine procedures.
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.