A Prospective, Multi-Center, Double-Blind, Randomized Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of the Synthetic Bone Graft Material DBM Gel with rhBMP-2 versus DBM Gel Used during the TLIF Procedure in Patients with Lumbar Disc Disease
- Author:
Seung-Jae HYUN
1
;
Seung Hwan YOON
;
Joo Han KIM
;
Jae Keun OH
;
Chang-Hyun LEE
;
Jun Jae SHIN
;
Jiin KANG
;
Yoon HA
Author Information
- Publication Type:Clinical Article
- From:Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society 2021;64(4):562-574
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Objective:: This study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of demineralized bone matrix (DBM) gel versus DBM gel with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) used in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF).
Methods:: This study was designed as a prospective, multi-center, double-blind method, randomized study. All randomized subjects underwent TLIF with DBM gel with rhBMP-2 group (40 patients) as an experimental group or DBM gel group (36 patients) as a control group. Post-operative observations were performed at 12, 24, and 48 weeks. The spinal fusion rate on computed tomography scans and X-rays films, Visual analog scale pain scores, Oswestry disability index and SF-36 quality of life (QOL) scores were used for the efficacy evaluation. The incidence rate of adverse device effects (ADEs) and serious adverse device effects (SADEs) were used for safety evaluation.
Results:: The spinal fusion rate at 12 weeks for the DBM gel with rhBMP-2 group was higher with 73.68% compared to 58.82% for the DBM gel group. The 24 and 48 weeks were 72.22% and 82.86% for the DBM gel with rhBMP-2 group and 78.79% and 78.13%, respectively, for the DBM gel group. However, there were no significant differences between two groups in the spinal fusion rate at 12, 24, and 48 weeks post-treatment (p=0.1817, p=0.5272, p=0.6247). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the incidence rate of ADEs (p=0.3836). For ADEs in the experimental group, ‘Pyrexia’ (5.00%) was the most common ADE, followed by ‘Hypesthesia’, ‘Paresthesia’, ‘Transient peripheral paralysis’, ‘Spondylitis’ and ‘Insomnia’ (2.50%, respectively). ADEs reported in control group included ‘Pyrexia’, ‘Chest discomfort’, ‘Pain’, ‘Osteoarthritis’, ‘Nephropathy toxic’, ‘Neurogenic bladder’, ‘Liver function analyses’ and ‘Urticaria’ (2.86%, respectively). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the incidence rate of SADEs (p=0.6594). For SADE in the experimental group, ‘‘Pyrexia’ and ‘Spondylitis’ were 2.50%. SADE reported in the control group included 'Chest discomfort’, ‘Osteoarthritis’ and ‘Neurogenic bladder’. All SADEs described above were resolved after medical treatment.
Conclusion:: This study demonstrated that the spinal fusion rates of DBM gel group and DBM gel with rhBMP-2 group were not significantly different. But, this study provides knowledge regarding the earlier postoperative effect of rhBMP-2 containing DBM gel and also supports the idea that the longer term follow-up results are essential to confirm the safety and effectiveness.
