The effect of bioactive glasses on spinal fusion: A cross-disciplinary systematic review and meta-analysis of the preclinical and clinical data

Cottrill, E. and Pennington, Z. and Lankipalle, N. and Ehresman, J. and Valencia, C. and Schilling, A. and Feghali, J. and Perdomo-Pantoja, A. and Theodore, N. and Sciubba, D. M. and Witham, T.

J Clin Neurosci (2020) 78: 34–46

DOI: 10.1016/j.jocn.2020.04.035

Abstract

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 \textless 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.

Citation

Cottrill, E., Pennington, Z., Lankipalle, N., Ehresman, J., Valencia, C., Schilling, A., Feghali, J., Perdomo-Pantoja, A., Theodore, N., Sciubba, D. M., & Witham, T. (2020). The effect of bioactive glasses on spinal fusion: A cross-disciplinary systematic review and meta-analysis of the preclinical and clinical data. J Clin Neurosci, 78, 34–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2020.04.035 Animals, Male, Female, Humans, Transplantation, Autologous, Bioactive glass, Bioglass, Ceramics/*therapeutic use, Nonunion, Pseudarthrosis, Pseudarthrosis/complications, Spinal Diseases/*surgery, Spinal fusion, Spinal Fusion/*methods

Keywords

• Animals
• Male
• Female
• Humans
• Transplantation
• Autologous
• Bioactive glass
• Bioglass
• Ceramics/*therapeutic use
• Nonunion
• Pseudarthrosis
• Pseudarthrosis/complications
• Spinal Diseases/*surgery
• Spinal fusion
• Spinal Fusion/*methods