Comparison of synthetic bone graft ABM/P-15 and allograft on uninstrumented posterior lumbar spine fusion in sheep

Martin G Axelsen, Søren Overgaard, Stig M Jespersen, Ming Ding, Martin G Axelsen, Søren Overgaard, Stig M Jespersen, Ming Ding

Abstract

Background: Spinal fusion is a commonly used procedure in spinal surgery. To ensure stable fusion, bone graft materials are used. ABM/P-15 (commercial name i-Factor™ Flex) is an available synthetic bone graft material that has CE approval in Europe. This peptide has been shown to improve bone formation when used in devices with fixation or on bone defects. However, the lack of external stability and large graft size make posterolateral lumbar fusion (PLF) a most challenging grafting procedure. This prospective randomized study was designed to evaluate early spinal fusion rates using an anorganic bovine-derived hydroxyapatite matrix (ABM) combined with a synthetic 15 amino acid sequence (P-15)-ABM/P-15 bone graft, and compared with allograft in an uninstrumented PLF model in sheep. The objective of this study was to assess fusion rates when using ABM/P-15 in uninstrumented posterolateral fusion in sheep.

Methods: Twelve Texas/Gotland mixed breed sheep underwent open PLF at 2 levels L2/L3 and L4/L5 without fixation instruments. The levels were randomized so that sheep received an ABM graft either with or without P15 coating. Sheep were euthanized after 4.5 months and levels were harvested and evaluated with a micro-CT scanner and qualitative histology. Fusion rates were assessed by 2D sections and 3D reconstruction images and fusion was defined as intertransverse bridging.

Results: There was 68% fusion rate in the allograft group and an extensive migration of graft material was noticed with a fusion rate of just 37% in the ABM/P-15 group. Qualitative histology showed positive osteointegration of the material and good correlation to scanning results.

Conclusions: In this PLF fusion model, ABM/P15 demonstrated the ability to migrate when lacking external stability. Due to this migration, reported fusion rates were significantly lower than in the allograft group. The use of ABM/P15 as i-Factor™ Flex may be limited to devices with fixation and bone defects.

Keywords: ABM/P-15; Histology; Micro-CT; Posterolateral spinal fusion; Sheep.

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The Danish Animal Experiments and Inspectorates approved this study (2011/561–195) and all experimental procedures were performed in accordance with ARRIVE guidelines and the Danish Animal Research guidelines.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Micro-CT images showed different bone formation patterns: allograft had nice bone formation with a combination of woven and lamellar bones. ABM/P-15 also displayed nice bone formation with clearly visible unresolved residue of hydroxyapatite. Upper left: 2D section of allograft (circle), and upper right: 3D reconstruction of allograft fusion mass. Lower left: 2D section of ABM/P-15 (circle). Upper right: 3D reconstruction of ABM/P-15 fusion mass
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
A photo of a migration of ABM/P-15 (blue circle): In this case, migration was ventrally and caudally situated on frontal side of the transverse processes
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Qualitative histology of fusion section with Toluidine blue 0.1% staining illustrated transition two zones. a Proximal transition zone from transverse process (lower-right part) to graft material (upper-left part) is illustrated: cortical bone has typical laminar structure and Haversian canals (H), and ABM granule (G) is surrounded by woven bone. b Distal transition zone from graft material (lower-right part) to fibrous tissue (lower-left) in non-fused mass with a clear gap in between. c Good osteointegration. Hydroxyapatite granule surrounded by woven bone. No foreign body giant cells

References

    1. Eck JC, Sharan A, Ghogawala Z, Resnick DK, Watters WC, III, Mummaneni PV, et al. Guideline update for the performance of fusion procedures for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine. Part 7: lumbar fusion for intractable low-back pain without stenosis or spondylolisthesis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2014;21:42–47. doi: 10.3171/2014.4.SPINE14270.
    1. Fischer CR, Ducoffe AR, Errico TJ. Posterior lumbar fusion: choice of approach and adjunct techniques. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2014;22:503–511. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-22-08-503.
    1. Rajaee SS, Bae HW, Kanim LE, Delamarter RB. Spinal fusion in the United States: analysis of trends from 1998 to 2008. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2012;37:67–76. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31820cccfb.
    1. Goz V, Weinreb JH, Schwab F, Lafage V, Errico TJ. Comparison of complications, costs, and length of stay of three different lumbar interbody fusion techniques: an analysis of the Nationwide inpatient sample database. Spine J. 2014;14:2019–2027. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.11.050.
    1. Buser Z, Brodke DS, Youssef JA, Rometsch E, Park JB, Yoon ST, et al. Allograft versus demineralized bone matrix in instrumented and noninstrumented lumbar fusion: a systematic review. Global Spine J. 2018;8:396–412. doi: 10.1177/2192568217735342.
    1. Pourtaheri S, Billings C, Bogatch M, Issa K, Haraszti C, Mangel D, et al. Outcomes of instrumented and noninstrumented posterolateral lumbar fusion. Orthopedics. 2015;38:e1104–e1109. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20151120-07.
    1. Teng I, Han J, Phan K, Mobbs R. A meta-analysis comparing ALIF, PLIF, TLIF and LLIF. J Clin Neurosci. 2017;44:11–17. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2017.06.013.
    1. Makanji H, Schoenfeld AJ, Bhalla A, Bono CM. Critical analysis of trends in lumbar fusion for degenerative disorders revisited: influence of technique on fusion rate and clinical outcomes. Eur Spine J. 2018;27(8):1868-76.
    1. Giannoudis PV, Dinopoulos H, Tsiridis E. Bone substitutes: an update. Injury. 2005;36 Suppl 3:S20–S27. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2005.07.029.
    1. Kurz LT, Garfin SR, Booth RE., Jr Harvesting autogenous iliac bone grafts. A review of complications and techniques. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1989;14:1324–1331. doi: 10.1097/00007632-198912000-00009.
    1. Khandan A, Abdellahi M, Barenji RV, Ozada N, Karamian E. Introducing natural hydroxyapatite-diopside (NHA-Di) nano-bioceramic coating. Ceram Int. 2015;41:12355–12363. doi: 10.1016/j.ceramint.2015.06.065.
    1. Khandan A, Ozada N, Saber-Samandari S, Nejad MG. On the mechanical and biological properties of bredigite-magnetite (Ca7MgSi4O16-Fe3O4) nanocomposite scaffolds. Ceram Int. 2018;44:3141–3148. doi: 10.1016/j.ceramint.2017.11.082.
    1. Goldberg VM, Stevenson S. Natural history of autografts and allografts. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1987;225:7-16.
    1. Thomsen K, Christensen FB, Eiskjaer SP, Hansen ES, Fruensgaard S, Bunger CE. 1997 Volvo award winner in clinical studies. The effect of pedicle screw instrumentation on functional outcome and fusion rates in posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion: a prospective, randomized clinical study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1997;22:2813–2822. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199712150-00004.
    1. Park JJ, Hershman SH, Kim YH. Updates in the use of bone grafts in the lumbar spine. Bull Hosp Jt Dis (2013 ) 2013;71:39–48.
    1. Bhatnagar RS, Qian JJ, Gough CA. The role in cell binding of a beta-bend within the triple helical region in collagen alpha 1 (I) chain: structural and biological evidence for conformational tautomerism on fiber surface. J Biomol Struct Dyn. 1997;14:547–560. doi: 10.1080/07391102.1997.10508155.
    1. Bhatnagar RS, Qian JJ, Wedrychowska A, Sadeghi M, Wu YM, Smith N. Design of biomimetic habitats for tissue engineering with P-15, a synthetic peptide analogue of collagen. Tissue Eng. 1999;5:53–65. doi: 10.1089/ten.1999.5.53.
    1. Nguyen H, Qian JJ, Bhatnagar RS, Li S. Enhanced cell attachment and osteoblastic activity by P-15 peptide-coated matrix in hydrogels. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2003;311:179–186. doi: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2003.09.192.
    1. Qian JJ, Bhatnagar RS. Enhanced cell attachment to anorganic bone mineral in the presence of a synthetic peptide related to collagen. J Biomed Mater Res. 1996;31:545–554. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4636(199608)31:4<545::AID-JBM15>;2-F.
    1. Yang XB, Bhatnagar RS, Li S, Oreffo RO. Biomimetic collagen scaffolds for human bone cell growth and differentiation. Tissue Eng. 2004;10:1148–1159. doi: 10.1089/ten.2004.10.1148.
    1. Ding M, Andreasen CM, Dencker ML, Jensen AE, Theilgaard N, Overgaard S. Efficacy of a small cell-binding peptide coated hydroxyapatite substitute on bone formation and implant fixation in sheep. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2015;103:1357–1365. doi: 10.1002/jbm.a.35281.
    1. Hestehave PR, Rasmussen M, Overgaard S, Ding M. Effects of P-15 peptide coated hydroxyapatite on Tibial defect repair in vivo in Normal and osteoporotic rats. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:253858.
    1. Sherman BP, Lindley EM, Turner AS, Seim HB, III, Benedict J, Burger EL, et al. Evaluation of ABM/P-15 versus autogenous bone in an ovine lumbar interbody fusion model. Eur Spine J. 2010;19:2156–2163. doi: 10.1007/s00586-010-1546-z.
    1. Mobbs RJ, Maharaj M, Rao PJ. Clinical outcomes and fusion rates following anterior lumbar interbody fusion with bone graft substitute i-FACTOR, an anorganic bone matrix/P-15 composite. J Neurosurg Spine. 2014;21:867–876. doi: 10.3171/2014.9.SPINE131151.
    1. Pearce AI, Richards RG, Milz S, Schneider E, Pearce SG. Animal models for implant biomaterial research in bone: a review. Eur Cell Mater. 2007;13:1–10. doi: 10.22203/eCM.v013a01.
    1. Zarrinkalam MR, Beard H, Schultz CG, Moore RJ. Validation of the sheep as a large animal model for the study of vertebral osteoporosis. Eur Spine J. 2009;18:244–253. doi: 10.1007/s00586-008-0813-8.
    1. Cuenca-Lopez MD, Andrades JA, Gomez S, Zamora-Navas P, Guerado E, Rubio N, et al. Evaluation of posterolateral lumbar fusion in sheep using mineral scaffolds seeded with cultured bone marrow cells. Int J Mol Sci. 2014;15:23359–23376. doi: 10.3390/ijms151223359.
    1. Kinaci A, Neuhaus V, Ring DC. Trends in bone graft use in the United States. Orthopedics. 2014;37:e783–e788. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20140825-54.
    1. Braye F, Irigaray JL, Jallot E, Oudadesse H, Weber G, Deschamps N, et al. Resorption kinetics of osseous substitute: natural coral and synthetic hydroxyapatite. Biomaterials. 1996;17:1345–1350. doi: 10.1016/S0142-9612(96)80013-5.

Source: PubMed

Подписаться