Response to letter to the editor and comment concerning “Combined use of tranexamic acid and rivaroxaban in posterior lumbar interbody fusion safely reduces blood loss and transfusion rates without increasing the risk of thrombosis—a prospective, stratified, randomized, controlled trial”

Author(s):  
Lu Zhang ◽  
Yanming Li ◽  
Dong Liu ◽  
Guangjun Jiao ◽  
Wenliang Wu ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Byung-Taek Kwon ◽  
Ho-Joong Kim ◽  
Sang-Min Park ◽  
Dae-Woong Ham ◽  
Ohsang Kwon ◽  
...  

Abstract Study design: Prospective randomized controlled trial.Background: The CaO-SiO2-P2O5-B2O3 glass-ceramic (BGS-7) spacer is a recently developed spacer that shows chemical bonding to bone with high mechanical stability. Further, this spacer achieves similar results to those of titanium cages. However, evidence regarding the advantages of the BGS-7 spacer is weak compared to polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage. A randomized controlled trial is therefore warranted. The purpose of this study was to compare the radiographic and clinical efficacies and safety of the BGS-7 spacer compared to those of the PEEK cage in patients who underwent posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Methods: The 54 participants who required one- or two-level PLIF due to lumbar degenerative disorders were randomly assigned to receive a BGS-7 spacer or PEEK cage. Visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), painDETECT score were evaluated before surgery and at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery. The fusion rate, degree of osteolysis, cage migration and subsidence around the cage (spacer) were evaluated on computer tomography (CT) images at 12 months after surgery. Results: The 12-month fusion rates were 75% in the BGS-7 spacer group and 79.3% in the PEEK cage group, with no significant difference (p=0.676). The result regarding the non-inferiority of BGS-7 spacer was inconclusive. The linear mixed model showed no significant intervention effect in VAS, ODI, EQ-5D, and painDETECT score at the 3-, 6-, or 12-month follow-up. In addition, we found no significant between-group differences in the extent of osteolysis, spacer migration. However, the subsidence around the cage was significantly lower in the BGS-7 spacer group. Conclusions: This trial found similar fusion rates, clinicoradiographic outcomes, and adverse events between the BGS-7 spacer and PEEK cage for PLIF. However, the non-inferiority was inconclusive, and thus, the BGS-7 spacer can be a feasible and safe alternative to PEEK cage in PLIF surgery after further studies.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document