ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2021
Lumbar spine fusion outcomes using a cellular bone allograft with lineage-committed bone-forming cells in 96 patients.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Twenty-four-month interim results from a prospective, single-arm clinical trial evaluating the performance and safety of cellular bone allograft in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Trial
- Comparison of Cortical Bone Trajectory and Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Fixation in PETLIF: Short-Term Perioperative Muscle Injury and Pain Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Do Cellular Allografts Improve Spinal Fusion Enough to Justify Their Cost and Potential Risk? A Systematic Review of Efficacy, Safety, and Cost.Neurosurgery practice · 2026Review
- Innovations in Clinical Maxillofacial Tissue Engineering and Reconstruction: Cellular Bone Matrix Allografts, Autografts, and Growth Factors.Craniomaxillofacial trauma & reconstruction · 2026Review
- High Lumbar Spinal Fusion Rates Using Cellular Bone Allograft Irrespective of Surgical Approach.International journal of spine surgery · 2024Article
- Diabetes increases risk of lumbar spinal fusion complications: association with altered structure of newly formed bone at the fusion site.JBMR plus · 2024Article
- Cellular Bone Matrix in Spine Surgery - Are They Worth the Risk: A Systematic Review.Global spine journal · 2024Review
- Radiographical outcomes of a cellular based allograft following foot/ankle arthrodesis in patients with risk for non-union.Orthopedic reviews · 2024Article
- Characterization of an advanced viable bone allograft with preserved native bone-forming cells.Cell and tissue banking · 2023Article
- Twelve-Month Results from a Prospective Clinical Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Cellular Bone Allograft in Subjects Undergoing Lumbar Spinal Fusion.Neurology international · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInstrumented posterior lumbar fusion (IPLF) with and without transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) is a common treatment for low back pain when conservative interventions have failed. Certain patient comorbidities and lifestyle risk factors, such as obesity and smoking, are known to negatively affect these procedures. An advanced cellular bone allograft (CBA) with viable osteogenic cells (V-CBA) has demonstrated high fusion rates, but the rates for patients with severe and/or multiple comorbidities remain understudied. The purpose of this study was to assess fusion outcomes in patients undergoing IPLF/TLIF using V-CBA with baseline comorbidities and lifestyle risk factors known to negatively affect bone fusion.
methodsThis was a retrospective study of de-identified data from consecutive patients at an academic medical center who underwent IPLF procedures with or without TLIF, and with V-CBA. Baseline patient and procedure characteristics were assessed. Radiological outcomes included fusion rates per the Lenke scale. Patient-reported clinical outcomes were evaluated via the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for back and leg pain. Operating room (OR) times and intraoperative blood loss rates were also assessed.
resultsData from 96 patients were assessed with a total of 222 levels treated overall (mean: 2.3 levels) and a median follow-up time of 16 months (range: 6 to 45 months). Successful fusion (Lenke A or B) was reported for 88 of 96 patients (91.7%) overall, including in all IPLF-only patients. Of 22 patients with diabetes in the IPLF+TLIF group, fusion was reported in 20 patients (90.9%). In IPLF+TLIF patients currently using tobacco (n = 19), fusion was reported in 16 patients (84.3%), while in those with a history of tobacco use (n = 53), fusion was observed in 48 patients (90.6%). Successful fusion was reported in all 6 patients overall with previous pseudarthrosis at the same level. Mean postoperative ODI and VAS scores were significantly reduced versus preoperative ratings.
conclusionThe results of this study suggest that V-CBA consistently yields successful fusion and significant decreases in patient-reported ODI and VAS, despite patient comorbidities and lifestyle risk factors that are known to negatively affect such bony healing.
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.