Cargando…

Preliminary study showing safety/efficacy of nanoss bioactive versus vitoss as bone graft expanders for lumbar noninstrumented fusions

BACKGROUND: The lateral fusion mass for multilevel lumbar laminectomies with noninstrumented posterolateral fusions now often utilizes lamina autograft and bone marrow aspirate (BMA) mixed with one of two bone graft expanders: either Vitoss (Orthovita, Malvern, PA, USA) or NanOss Bioactive (Regenera...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Epstein, Nancy E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4496830/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26167369
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2152-7806.159380
_version_ 1782380466021597184
author Epstein, Nancy E.
author_facet Epstein, Nancy E.
author_sort Epstein, Nancy E.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The lateral fusion mass for multilevel lumbar laminectomies with noninstrumented posterolateral fusions now often utilizes lamina autograft and bone marrow aspirate (BMA) mixed with one of two bone graft expanders: either Vitoss (Orthovita, Malvern, PA, USA) or NanOss Bioactive (Regeneration Technologies Corporation: RTI, Alachua, FL, USA). METHODS: Here, we compared two sequential prospective the times to fusion, fusion rates, complications, and infection rates for two prospective cohorts of patients utilizing either Vitoss (first 213 patients) or NanOss (subsequent 45 patients) respectively, undergoing multilevel lumbar laminectomies (average 4.6 vs. 4.5 levels) with noninstrumented fusions (average 1.3 vs. 1.2 levels). Surgery addressed stenosis/ossification of the yellow ligament (OYL) (all patients), with subsets exhibiting degenerative spondylolisthesis synovial cysts, and disc disease. Fusion was documented by two independent neuroradiologists blinded to the study design, utilizing dynamic X-rays and two dimensional computed tomography (2D-CT) studies up to 6 months postoperatively, and up to 1 year where indicated. RESULTS: Comparison of patients receiving Vitoss versus NanOss as bone graft expanders revealed nearly comparable; times to fusion (5.3 months vs. 4.8 months), fusion rates (210 [98.6%] vs. 45 [100%] patients), pseudarthroses (3 [1.4%] vs. 0), postoperative seromas (2 [0.94%] vs. 0), and deep wound infections (2 [0.94%] vs. 0). CONCLUSION: In this preliminary study of patients undergoing multilevel lumbar lamienctomies with posterolateral noninstrumented fusions, results were nearly comparable utilizing Vitoss or NanOss as bone graft expanders. Although the number of NanOss patients was substantially lower, the comparable efficacy and absence of postoperative complications for noninstrumented fusions is promising.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4496830
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44968302015-07-12 Preliminary study showing safety/efficacy of nanoss bioactive versus vitoss as bone graft expanders for lumbar noninstrumented fusions Epstein, Nancy E. Surg Neurol Int Surgical Neurology International: Spine BACKGROUND: The lateral fusion mass for multilevel lumbar laminectomies with noninstrumented posterolateral fusions now often utilizes lamina autograft and bone marrow aspirate (BMA) mixed with one of two bone graft expanders: either Vitoss (Orthovita, Malvern, PA, USA) or NanOss Bioactive (Regeneration Technologies Corporation: RTI, Alachua, FL, USA). METHODS: Here, we compared two sequential prospective the times to fusion, fusion rates, complications, and infection rates for two prospective cohorts of patients utilizing either Vitoss (first 213 patients) or NanOss (subsequent 45 patients) respectively, undergoing multilevel lumbar laminectomies (average 4.6 vs. 4.5 levels) with noninstrumented fusions (average 1.3 vs. 1.2 levels). Surgery addressed stenosis/ossification of the yellow ligament (OYL) (all patients), with subsets exhibiting degenerative spondylolisthesis synovial cysts, and disc disease. Fusion was documented by two independent neuroradiologists blinded to the study design, utilizing dynamic X-rays and two dimensional computed tomography (2D-CT) studies up to 6 months postoperatively, and up to 1 year where indicated. RESULTS: Comparison of patients receiving Vitoss versus NanOss as bone graft expanders revealed nearly comparable; times to fusion (5.3 months vs. 4.8 months), fusion rates (210 [98.6%] vs. 45 [100%] patients), pseudarthroses (3 [1.4%] vs. 0), postoperative seromas (2 [0.94%] vs. 0), and deep wound infections (2 [0.94%] vs. 0). CONCLUSION: In this preliminary study of patients undergoing multilevel lumbar lamienctomies with posterolateral noninstrumented fusions, results were nearly comparable utilizing Vitoss or NanOss as bone graft expanders. Although the number of NanOss patients was substantially lower, the comparable efficacy and absence of postoperative complications for noninstrumented fusions is promising. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2015-06-25 /pmc/articles/PMC4496830/ /pubmed/26167369 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2152-7806.159380 Text en Copyright: © 2015 Epstein NE. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Surgical Neurology International: Spine
Epstein, Nancy E.
Preliminary study showing safety/efficacy of nanoss bioactive versus vitoss as bone graft expanders for lumbar noninstrumented fusions
title Preliminary study showing safety/efficacy of nanoss bioactive versus vitoss as bone graft expanders for lumbar noninstrumented fusions
title_full Preliminary study showing safety/efficacy of nanoss bioactive versus vitoss as bone graft expanders for lumbar noninstrumented fusions
title_fullStr Preliminary study showing safety/efficacy of nanoss bioactive versus vitoss as bone graft expanders for lumbar noninstrumented fusions
title_full_unstemmed Preliminary study showing safety/efficacy of nanoss bioactive versus vitoss as bone graft expanders for lumbar noninstrumented fusions
title_short Preliminary study showing safety/efficacy of nanoss bioactive versus vitoss as bone graft expanders for lumbar noninstrumented fusions
title_sort preliminary study showing safety/efficacy of nanoss bioactive versus vitoss as bone graft expanders for lumbar noninstrumented fusions
topic Surgical Neurology International: Spine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4496830/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26167369
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/2152-7806.159380
work_keys_str_mv AT epsteinnancye preliminarystudyshowingsafetyefficacyofnanossbioactiveversusvitossasbonegraftexpandersforlumbarnoninstrumentedfusions