ReviewGlobal spine journal2018
Allograft Versus Demineralized Bone Matrix in Instrumented and Noninstrumented Lumbar Fusion: A Systematic Review.
Review in Global spine journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of fusion rate enhancements and bone graft options for spine surgery.Scientific reports · 2022Pooled it
- Hydrogel delivery of demineralized bone matrix augmented with ROS-triggered biomineralization and Trb3 activation for enhanced bone regeneration.Biomaterials · 2027Article
- Article
- Use of allograft bone matrix in clinical orthopedics.Regenerative medicine · 2024Review
- The Role of Osteobiologics in Augmenting Spine Fusion in Unplated Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Compared to Plated Constructs: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Global spine journal · 2024Article
- Bone Grafting Options for Single-Level TLIF: So Many Options, What Is the Evidence?International journal of spine surgery · 2023Article
- Demineralized Bone Matrix and Fibers in Spinal Fusion.International journal of spine surgery · 2023Article
- Demineralized cortical fibers are associated with a low pseudarthrosis rate in patients undergoing surgery for adult spinal deformity without three-column osteotomy.Brain & spine · 2023Article
- Demineralized Bone Matrix in Spine Surgery: A Review of Current Applications and Future Trends.International journal of spine surgery · 2021Article
- Surgical outcomes of two kinds of demineralized bone matrix putties/local autograft composites in instrumented posterolateral lumbar fusion.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2021Article
- Development of AOSpine BOnE (Bone Osteobiologics and Evidence) Classification.Global spine journal · 2020Article
- New Strategies in Enhancing Spinal Fusion.HSS journal : the musculoskeletal journal of Hospital for Special Surgery · 2020Review
- Screw-Related Complications After Instrumentation of the Osteoporotic Spine: A Systematic Literature Review With Meta-Analysis.Global spine journal · 2020Review
- Graft Materials and Biologics for Spinal Interbody Fusion.Biomedicines · 2019Review
- AOSpine Knowledge Forums: Research in Motion.Global spine journal · 2019Article
- Comparison of synthetic bone graft ABM/P-15 and allograft on uninstrumented posterior lumbar spine fusion in sheep.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designSystematic review.
objectivesThe aim was to determine the fusion efficacy of allograft and demineralized bone matrix (DBM) in lumbar instrumented and noninstrumented fusion procedures for degenerative lumbar disorders.
methodsA literature search was conducted using the PubMed and Cochrane databases. To be considered, publications had to meet 4 criteria: patients were treated for a degenerative lumbar disorder, a minimum group size of 10 patients, use of allograft or DBM, and at least a 2-year follow-up. Data on the study population, follow-up time, surgery type, grafting material, fusion rates, and its definition were collected.
resultsThe search yielded 692 citations with 17 studies meeting the criteria including 4 retrospective and 13 prospective studies. Six studies used DBM and 11 employed allograft alone or in the combination with autograft. For the allograft, fusion rates ranged from 58% to 68% for noninstrumented and from 68% to 98% for instrumented procedures. For DBM, fusion rates were 83% for noninstrumented and between 60% and 100% for instrumented lumbar fusion procedures.
conclusionsBoth allograft and DBM appeared to provide similar fusion rates in instrumented fusions. On the other hand, in noninstrumented procedures DBM was superior. However, a large variation in the type of surgery, outcomes collection, lack of control groups, and follow-up time prevented any significant conclusions. Thus, studies comparing the performance of allograft and DBM to adequate controls in large, well-defined patient populations and with a sufficient follow-up time are needed to establish the efficacy of these materials as adjuncts to fusion.
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.