동결 건조된 동종골의 혼합이식을 이용한 요추 후외방 유합술의 유용성

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study was made of patients undergoing posterolateral fusion of the lumbar spine.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the clinical outcomes of the patients who underwent posterolateral fusion of the lumbar spine with commercially available allogeneic bone graft with those patients in a similar consecutive control group who underwent posterolateral fusion of the lumbar spine with autogenic bone graft and to determine whether the commercially available allogeneic bone is useful for postero-lateral fusion of the lumbar spine.

SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEW: Major differences exist in the ability of an allogeneic bone graft to regenerate a viable cellular network as compared to an autogenic bone graft. This is related to the immunologic response of the host to the foreign bone. The fusion rate of deep freezing allogeneic bone graft was reported as 80-100%.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Seventy-nine patients with spondylolisthesis treated with decompression, fixation with pedicle screws and posterolateral fusion were retrospectively reviewed. Nineteen patients (group 1) were treated with commercially available allogeneic bone (Tutoplast) graft mixed with autogenic bone and the remaining 60 patients (group 2) were treated with autogenic bone graft. Operating time, amount of transfusion, duration of hospital stay, symptom improvement, fusion rate, duration of fusion, and complications were studied.

RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of duration of hospital stay, amount of transfusion, symptom improvement, and complications . However, there were significant differences between the allogeneic and autogenic groups in terms of operating time (212.3 versus 230.9 minutes), fusion rate (36.8% versus 98.3%), and duration of fusion (10.2 versus 6.4 months), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: Commercially available allogeneic bone is less useful for posterolateral fusion of the lumbar spine.