ArticleFrontiers in surgery2015
Within Patient Radiological Comparative Analysis of the Performance of Two Bone Graft Extenders Utilized in Posterolateral Lumbar Fusion: A Retrospective Case Series.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Synthetic osteobiologics in spine surgery: a review.Turkish journal of medical sciences · 2025Review
- Use of Autologous Stem Cells in Lumbar Spinal Fusion: A Systematic Review of Current Clinical Evidence.Global spine journal · 2021Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two bone graft extenders differing in chemical composition were implanted contralaterally in 27 consecutive patients undergoing instrumented posterolateral lumbar fusion as standard-of-care. Bone marrow aspirate and autogenous bone graft were equally combined either with β-tricalcium phosphate (β-TCP) or a hybrid biomaterial [containing hyaluronic acid (HyA) but lacking a calcium salt] and implanted between the transverse processes. Fusion status on each side of the vertebrae was retrospectively graded (1-5 scale) on AP planar X-ray at multiple visits as available, through approximately 12 months. Additionally, consolidation or resorption since prior visit for each treatment was recorded. Sides receiving β-TCP extender showed marked resorption prior to bone consolidation during the first 6 months. By contrast, sides receiving the hybrid biomaterial containing integrated HyA showed rapid bone consolidation by week 6-8, with maintenance of initial bone volume through 12 months. Fusion grade was superior for the hybrid biomaterial, differing significantly from β-TCP at day 109 and beyond. Fusion success at >12 months was 92.9 vs. 67.9% for the hybrid biomaterial and β-TCP-treated sides, respectively. The hybrid biomaterial extender demonstrated a shortened time-to-fusion compared to the calcium-based graft. Mode of action has been demonstrated in the literature to differ between these compositions. Therefore, choice of synthetic biomaterial composition may significantly influence the mode of action of cellular events regulating appositional bone growth.
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.