Review of studies comparing DBM to other bone grafts or implants in thoracolumbar spine.
| Study | Design | Patient Population | Groups (No. of Patients) | Follow-Up, mo | Fusion Rates | Other Outcomes | Notes |
| Kang et al, 201240 | Prospective and randomized | Single-level posterolateral fusion | DBM (30) vs autologous ICBG (16) | 24 | 86% DBM vs 92% ICBG (P > 0.99) | No difference in ODI or physical functioning scores; increased operative blood loss with ICBG (P < 0.0031). | Grafton DBM matrix |
| Schizas et al, 200842 | Prospective | Posterolateral fusion | DBM (33) vs ICBG or LA (26) | 12 | 70% DBM vs 77% autograft (P = 0.77) | No difference in ODI | Accell Connexus |
| Vaccaro et al, 200743 | Prospective | Posterolateral fusion | DBM with bone marrow (19) vs DBM with ICBG (27 patients) vs ICBG (27 patients) | 24 | 63% DBM-bone marrow vs 70% DBM-ICBG vs 67% ICBG (P = 0.88) | Grafton DBM | |
| Cammisa et al, 200444 | Prospective intrapatient control | Posterolateral fusion | 120 patients in total, DBM on one side, ICBG on the other | 24 | 52% DBM vs 54% ICBG | Grafton DBM | |
| Sassard et al, 200045 | Prospective case control | Posterolateral fusion | DBM (56) vs autologous ICBG (52) | 24 | 60% DBM vs 56% ICBG (P = 0.83) | 15 ICBG patients reported donor site pain | Grafton DBM |
| Ricart et al, 201846 | Retrospective | Posterolateral fusion | DBM (21) vs BTP (20) | 12 | 90% DBM vs 70% BTP (P = 0.09) | No difference in revision rates or visual analog scores | Grafton DBM |
| Fu et al, 201641 | Retrospective consecutive | Posterolateral fusion >3 levels | DBM (26) vs autologous ICBG (21) | 81% DBM vs 86% ICBG (P = 0.72) | Increased operative blood loss with ICBG (P = 0.02) | Allomatrix DBM putty | |
| Nam & Yi, 201647 | Retrospective consecutive | Posterolateral fusion | DBM (38) vs HA (41) | 12 | 73% DBM vs 58% HA (P = 0.15) | No difference in ODI or infection | Bonfuse DBM |
| Baumann et al, 201548 | Retrospective | Thoracolumbar fractures | DBM (16) vs autologous ICBG (46) | 94% DBM vs 100% ICBG (P = 0.26) | Synthes DBM | ||
| Thalgott et al, 200149 | Retrospective | Posterolateral fusion | DBM (28) vs LA (12) | 92.5% DBM vs 100% LA (P not reported) | Grafton DBM with coralline HA | ||
| Interbody Fusions | |||||||
| Ko et al, 202250 | Retrospective | Single-level PLIF | DBM (20) vs LA (20) | 12 | Brantigan-Steffee score 4.4 DBM vs 3.7 LA (P = 0.001) | No difference in ODI | SurFuse |
| Kim et al, 201651 | Retrospective | ALIF, PLIF, and TLIF | HA-DBM (65) vs LA (65) | 12 | 52% HA-DBM vs 62% LA (P = 0.21) | Improvement in ODI in both groups when fusion was achieved; lower rates of fusion with older age and decreased bone mineral density | Bonfuse HA-DBM |
| Ahn et al, 201452 | Retrospective | PLIF | DBM (44) vs LA (70) | 24 | Not reported | No difference in degree of bone formation or ODI | Allomatrix DBM |
Abbreviations: ALIF, anterior lumbar interbody fusion; BTP, β-tricalcium phosphate; DBM, demineralized bone matrix; HA, hydroxyapatite; ICBG, iliac crest bone graft; LA, local autograft; ODI, Oswestry Disability Index; PLIF, posterior lumbar interbody fusion; TLIF, transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion.