Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to quantify the frequency of complications associated with recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2 (rhBMP-2) use in anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF). METHODS: The orthopedic subset of the Medicare database (PearlDiver) was queried for this retrospective cohort study using International Statistical Classification of Diseases 9 (ICD-9) and Current Procedure Terminology (CPT) codes for ALIF procedures with and without rhBMP-2 between 2005 and 2010. Frequencies of complications and reoperations were then identified within 1 year from the index procedure. Complications included reoperations, pulmonary embolus, deep vein thrombosis, myocardial infarction, nerve-related complications, incision and drainage procedures, wound, sepsis, pneumonia, urinary tract infections, respiratory, heterotopic ossification, retrograde ejaculation, radiculopathy, and other medical complications. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to assess the statistical significance. RESULTS: We identified a total of 41 865 patients who had an ALIF procedure. A total of 14 384 patients received rhBMP-2 while 27 481 did not. Overall, 6016 (41.8%) complications within 1 year from surgery were noted within the group who received rhBMP-2 and 12 950 (47.1%) complications within 1 year from surgery were recorded in those who did not receive rhBMP-2 (OR = 0.81, CI = 0.77-0.84). Overall, exposure to rhBMP-2 was associated with significantly decreased odds of complications with exception to reoperation rates (0.9% rhBMP-2 vs 1.0% no rhBMP-2; OR = 0.88, CI = 0.71-1.09) and radiculopathy (4.4% rhBMP-2 vs 4.3% no rhBMP-2; OR = 1.02, CI = 0.93-1.13). CONCLUSIONS: The use of rhBMP-2 in patients undergoing ALIF procedure was associated with a significantly decreased rate of complications. Further studies are needed to elucidate a true incidence of complication.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hindoyan et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: