Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research : OTSR · 2025
Unexpected findings on CT scan after use of ABM/P-15 as a bone substitute for anterior lumbar interbody fusion.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Aleman Carlos, Ross Nicolas, Phan Philippe, Dhenin Alexandre, Vassal Matthieu, Lonjon Guillaume
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) is an alternative for treating spine pathologies. Bone substitutes are increasingly used to enhance fusion and minimize iliac graft harvest complications. Despite numerous options, no gold standard exists. After we started using anorganic bone matrix/15-amino acid peptide fragment (ABM/P-15), we observed unexpected abnormal findings on postoperative CT scan. Our study aimed to investigate this matter: is ABM/P-15 associated with a higher rate of these findings than other substitutes? Do they impact fusion or clinical outcomes?
HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that the use of ABM/P-15 was associated with more unexpected findings, potentially impacting fusion or clinical outcomes.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included patients undergoing ALIF between 2020 and 2022, divided into two groups: one having received ABM/P-15 and the other different bone substitutes (InductOS, TBF, MagnetOs, ß gel). Unexpected findings (migration or calcification) and fusion rates were evaluated on postoperative (3- and 12-month) CT scan. Clinical outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and pain) were also measured.
RESULTS: Among 152 patients (76 per group), unexpected findings were more prevalent with ABM/P-15 [40 patients (53%) vs 1 (1%); p < 0.001]. Regardless, both groups were similar in fusion rates at 1 year [72 patients (95%) vs 68 (89%); p = 0.367] and clinical outcomes (ODI decrease: 17 vs 19 points, p = 0.491).
CONCLUSION: ABM/P-15 showed a higher incidence of unexpected findings (calcification or product migration) than other bone substitutes, with no impact in fusion success or clinical outcomes.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that the use of ABM/P-15 was associated with more unexpected findings, potentially impacting fusion or clinical outcomes.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included patients undergoing ALIF between 2020 and 2022, divided into two groups: one having received ABM/P-15 and the other different bone substitutes (InductOS, TBF, MagnetOs, ß gel). Unexpected findings (migration or calcification) and fusion rates were evaluated on postoperative (3- and 12-month) CT scan. Clinical outcomes (Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and pain) were also measured.
RESULTS: Among 152 patients (76 per group), unexpected findings were more prevalent with ABM/P-15 [40 patients (53%) vs 1 (1%); p < 0.001]. Regardless, both groups were similar in fusion rates at 1 year [72 patients (95%) vs 68 (89%); p = 0.367] and clinical outcomes (ODI decrease: 17 vs 19 points, p = 0.491).
CONCLUSION: ABM/P-15 showed a higher incidence of unexpected findings (calcification or product migration) than other bone substitutes, with no impact in fusion success or clinical outcomes.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.