Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35733056›Full record

ReviewSpine deformity2022

Use of graft materials and biologics in spine deformity surgery: a state-of-the-art review.

Ki-Eun Chang, Mohamed Kamal Mesregah, Zoe Fresquez, Eloise W Stanton, Zorica Buser, Jeffrey C Wang

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Spine deformity, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Ki-Eun ChangDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, 1450 San Pablo St., HC4, Suite 5400A, Los Angeles, CA, 90003, USA.
Mohamed Kamal MesregahDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, 1450 San Pablo St., HC4, Suite 5400A, Los Angeles, CA, 90003, USA.
Zoe FresquezDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, 1450 San Pablo St., HC4, Suite 5400A, Los Angeles, CA, 90003, USA.
Eloise W StantonDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, 1450 San Pablo St., HC4, Suite 5400A, Los Angeles, CA, 90003, USA.
Zorica BuserDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, 1450 San Pablo St., HC4, Suite 5400A, Los Angeles, CA, 90003, USA. zorica.buser@gerlinginstitute.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5680-0643
Jeffrey C WangDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, 1450 San Pablo St., HC4, Suite 5400A, Los Angeles, CA, 90003, USA.
University of Southern California · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of the current review is to summarize the current evidence on graft materials used in fusion procedures for spinal deformity corrections.

methodsPubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched for relevant published observational studies and clinical trials using osteobiologics and biomaterials in spinal deformity surgery.

resultsThe use of autograft in deformity correction surgeries has been reported in a limited number of studies, with the harvest sites including iliac crest, ribs, and local bone. Various allografts and biologics have been used in the treatment of spinal deformities including idiopathic and degenerative scoliosis, either as stand alone or in combination with autograft. Limited number of studies reported no differences in fusion rates or outcomes. Use of rh-BMP2 in anterior, posterior or front/back approaches showed higher fusion rates than other graft materials in patients with spinal deformities. Due to the limited number of quality studies included in the review, as well as alternative factors, such as costs, availability, and surgeon expertise/preference, no definitive conclusion or recommendations can be made as to the ideal graft choice in spinal deformity surgery.

conclusionsMost commonly used grafts included autograft, allograft and rh-BMP2, with new biologics and biomaterials constantly emerging in the market. Limited number of high-quality comparative studies and heterogeneity in study design prevented direct comparisons that can lead to meaningful recommendations. Further studies are needed to prove superiority of any single graft material and/or biologic that is also cost-effective and safe.

Indexed as

Biological ProductsSpinal FusionBiocompatible MaterialsBone TransplantationHumansIliumBiocompatible MaterialsBiological ProductsDeformityEvidenceOsteobiologicsOutcomesReviewThorcaci spine

Identifiers

PMID35733056
OpenAlexW4283328639

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.