Abstract
Cervical and lumbar spine fusion procedures are increasing every year. Nonetheless, these procedures are associated with high infection rates, resulting in additional cost burden. The conundrum of achieving efficient spinal fusions with minimum complications requires an ideal bone graft with osteoconductive, osteoinductive, osteogenic and structural characteristics. Synthetic bone graft substitutes with or without autograft, allograft or synthetic bone substitutes have been commonly used for fusion procedures. We carried out a meta-analysis of comparative studies and prospective case series (n = 29) with cervical and lumbar fusion procedures using synthetic bone graft substitutes, autograft or allograft and other biologics. Synthetic bone graft substitutes analysed included HA (Hydroxyapatite), β-TPC (Tri Calcium Phosphate), β-TSC (Tri Calcium Sulfate), PMMA (Polymethylmetacrylate), Surgibone, BOP (Biocompatible Osteoconductive Polymer). The analysis revealed suboptimal evidence for the efficacy and safety of synthetic products used in spinal fusion procedures. Further studies are needed to determine beneficial effects of synthetic substitutes. However, the infection rate could be highly decreased with surface and composition modification of widely used polyether ether ketone (PEEK) implants. Laser modification of surface characteristics and collagen fleeces with micro and nano pore structures can prove to be excellent surface for increased osteoblasts cell proliferation and vitality.
