Matched Comparison of Fusion Rates between Hydroxyapatite Demineralized Bone Matrix and Autograft in Lumbar Interbody Fusion.
10.3340/jkns.2016.59.4.363
- Author:
Dae Hwan KIM
1
;
Nam LEE
;
Dong Ah SHIN
;
Seong YI
;
Keung Nyun KIM
;
Yoon HA
Author Information
1. Department of Neurosurgery, Spine and Spinal Cord Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. hayoon@yuhs.ac
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Hydroxyapatite;
Autograft;
Fusion;
CT scan
- MeSH:
Autografts*;
Body Mass Index;
Bone Density;
Bone Matrix*;
Durapatite*;
Health Surveys;
Humans;
Risk Factors;
Tomography, X-Ray Computed
- From:Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
2016;59(4):363-367
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE: To compare the fusion rate of a hydroxyapatite demineralized bone matrix (DBM) with post-laminectomy acquired autograft in lumbar interbody fusion surgery and to evaluate the correlation between fusion rate and clinical outcome. METHODS: From January 2013 to April 2014, 98 patients underwent lumbar interbody fusion surgery with hydroxyapatite DBM (HA-DBM group) in our institute. Of those patients, 65 received complete CT scans for 12 months postoperatively in order to evaluate fusion status. For comparison with autograft, we selected another 65 patients who underwent lumbar interbody fusion surgery with post-laminectomy acquired autograft (Autograft group) during the same period. Both fusion material groups were matched in terms of age, sex, body mass index (BMI), and bone mineral density (BMD). To evaluate the clinical outcomes, we analyzed the results of visual analogue scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). RESULTS: We reviewed the CT scans of 149 fusion levels in 130 patients (HA-DBM group, 75 levels/65 patients; Autograft group, 74 levels/65 patients). Age, sex, BMI, and BMD were not significantly different between the groups (p=0.528, p=0.848, p=0.527, and p=0.610, respectively). The HA-DBM group showed 39 of 75 fused levels (52%), and the Autograft group showed 46 of 74 fused levels (62.2%). This difference was not statistically significant (p=0.21). In the HA-DBM group, older age and low BMD were significantly associated with non-fusion (61.24 vs. 66.68, p=0.027; -1.63 vs. -2.29, p=0.015, respectively). VAS and ODI showed significant improvement after surgery when fusion was successfully achieved in both groups (p=0.004, p=0.002, HA-DBM group; p=0.012, p=0.03, Autograft group). CONCLUSION: The fusion rates of the hydroxyapatite DBM and Autograft groups were not significantly different. In addition, clinical outcomes were similar between the groups. However, older age and low BMD are risk factors that might induce non-union after surgery with hydroxyapatite DBM.
