Department of Neurosurgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Department of Neurosurgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
J Clin Neurosci. 2020 Aug;78:34-46. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2020.04.035. Epub 2020 Apr 21.
Pseudarthrosis following spinal fusion is correlated with poorer patient outcomes and consequently is an area of continued interest within spinal research. Recently, bioactive glasses have been proposed as a means of augmenting fusion rates. Here, we present the first systematic review and meta-analysis of the existing preclinical and clinical literature on the effect of bioactive glasses on spinal fusion. Using the MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science databases, we queried all publications in the English-language literature examining the effect of bioactive glasses on spinal fusion. The primary endpoint was fusion rate at last follow-up and the secondary endpoint for clinical studies was the rate of deep wound infection. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed independently for the preclinical and clinical data. Twelve preclinical studies (267 animals) and 12 clinical studies (396 patients) evaluating a total of twelve unique bioactive glass formulations were included. Across clinical studies, fusion was seen in 84% treated with bioactive glass. On sub-analysis, fusion rates were similar for standalone autograft (91.6%) and bioactive glass-local autograft mixtures (89.6%). Standalone bioactive glass substrates produced inferior fusion rates relative to autograft alone (33.6% vs. 98.8%; OR 0.01, p < 0.02). Rates of deep wound infection did not differ between the bioactive glass and autograft groups (3.1%). The preclinical data similarly showed comparable rates of fusion between autograft and bioactive glass-treated animals. The available data suggest that bioactive glass-autograft mixtures confer similar rates of spinal fusion relative to standalone autograft without altering the risk of deep wound infection.
脊柱融合术后假关节形成与患者预后较差相关,因此是脊柱研究领域持续关注的领域。最近,生物活性玻璃已被提议作为提高融合率的一种手段。在这里,我们对生物活性玻璃对脊柱融合影响的现有临床前和临床文献进行了系统评价和荟萃分析。我们使用 MEDLINE、Embase 和 Web of Science 数据库,查询了所有以英文发表的研究生物活性玻璃对脊柱融合影响的文献。主要终点是最后随访时的融合率,临床研究的次要终点是深部伤口感染率。对临床前和临床数据分别进行了随机效应荟萃分析。共纳入 12 项临床前研究(267 只动物)和 12 项临床研究(396 例患者),共评估了 12 种不同的生物活性玻璃配方。在临床研究中,用生物活性玻璃治疗的患者中有 84%融合。亚分析显示,单独使用同种异体移植物(91.6%)和生物活性玻璃-同种异体移植物混合物(89.6%)的融合率相似。与单独使用同种异体移植物相比,单独使用生物活性玻璃基质的融合率较低(33.6%比 98.8%;OR 0.01,p<0.02)。生物活性玻璃组和同种异体移植物组之间深部伤口感染的发生率没有差异(3.1%)。临床前数据也显示,同种异体移植物和生物活性玻璃处理的动物之间的融合率相似。现有数据表明,生物活性玻璃-同种异体移植物混合物与单独使用同种异体移植物相比,可获得相似的脊柱融合率,而不会增加深部伤口感染的风险。