Existing clinical evidence on the use of cellular bone matrix grafts in spinal fusion: updated systematic review of the literature. Review uri icon

Overview

abstract

  • OBJECTIVE: Spinal fusion surgery is increasingly common; however, pseudarthrosis remains a common complication affecting as much as 15% of some patient populations. Currently, no clear consensus on the best bone graft materials to use exists. Recent advances have led to the development of cell-infused cellular bone matrices (CBMs), which contain living components such as mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). Relatively few clinical outcome studies on the use of these grafts exist, although the number of such studies has increased in the last 5 years. In this study, the authors aimed to summarize and critically evaluate the existing clinical evidence on commercially available CBMs in spinal fusion and reported clinical outcomes. METHODS: The authors performed a systematic search of the MEDLINE and PubMed electronic databases for peer-reviewed, English-language original articles (1970-2020) in which the articles' authors studied the clinical outcomes of CBMs in spinal fusion. The US National Library of Medicine electronic clinical trials database (www.ClinicalTrials.gov) was also searched for relevant ongoing clinical trials. RESULTS: Twelve published studies of 6 different CBM products met inclusion criteria: 5 studies of Osteocel Plus/Osteocel (n = 354 unique patients), 3 of Trinity Evolution (n = 114), 2 of ViviGen (n = 171), 1 of map3 (n = 41), and 1 of VIA Graft (n = 75). All studies reported high radiographic fusion success rates (range 87%-100%) using these CBMs. However, this literature was overwhelmingly limited to single-center, noncomparative studies. Seven studies disclosed industry funding or conflicts of interest (COIs). There are 4 known trials of ViviGen (3 trials) and Bio4 (1 trial) that are ongoing. CONCLUSIONS: CBMs are a promising technology with the potential of improving outcome after spinal fusion. However, while the number of studies conducted in humans has tripled since 2014, there is still insufficient evidence in the literature to recommend for or against CBMs relative to cheaper alternative materials. Comparative, multicenter trials and outcome registries free from industry COIs are indicated.

authors

  • Darveau, Spencer
  • Leary, Owen P
  • Persad-Paisley, Elijah M
  • Shaaya, Elias A
  • Oyelese, Adetokunbo A
  • Fridley, Jared S
  • Sampath, Prakash
  • Camara-Quintana, Joaquin Q
  • Gokaslan, Ziya L
  • Niu, Tianyi

publication date

  • June 1, 2021

Research

keywords

  • Spinal Diseases
  • Spinal Fusion

Identity

Scopus Document Identifier

  • 85107405487

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.3171/2021.3.FOCUS2173

PubMed ID

  • 34062506

Additional Document Info

volume

  • 50

issue

  • 6