Combined magnetic fields provide robust coverage for interbody and posterolateral lumbar spinal fusion sites

Noninvasive electrical stimulation as an adjunct to fusion procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Noninvasive electrical stimulation represents a distinct group of devices used to augment fusion rates. However, data regarding outcomes of noninvasive electrical stimulation have come from a small number of studies. The goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine outcomes of noninvasive electrical stimulation used as an adjunct to fusion procedures to improve rates of successful fusion.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Clinical Trials database were searched according to search strategy and PRISMA guidelines. Random-effects meta-analyses of fusion rates with the three main modalities of noninvasive electrical stimulation, capacitively coupled stimulation (CCS), pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMFs), and combined magnetic fields (CMFs), were conducted using R version 4.1.0 (The R Foundation for Statistical Computing). Both retrospective studies and clinical trials were included. Animal studies were excluded. Risk-of-bias analysis was performed with the Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) and Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tools.

RESULTS

Searches of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Clinical Trials database identified 8 articles with 1216 participants meeting criteria from 213 initial results. There was a high overall risk of bias identified for the majority of randomized studies. No meta-analysis could be performed for CCS as only 1 study was identified. Meta-analysis of 6 studies of fusion rates in PEMF did not find any difference between treatment and control groups (OR 1.89, 95% CI 0.36-9.80, p = 0.449). Meta-analysis of 2 studies of CMF found no difference in fusion rates between control and treatment groups (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.07-11.93, p = 0.939). Subgroup analysis of PEMF was limited given the small number of studies and patients, although significantly increased fusion rates were seen in some subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and fusion rates in noninvasive electrical stimulation compared to no stimulation did not identify any increases in fusion rates for any modality. A high degree of heterogeneity between studies was noted. Although subgroup analysis identified significant differences in fusion rates in certain groups, these findings were based on a small number of studies and further research is needed. This analysis does not support routine use of these devices to augment fusion rates, although the data are limited by a high risk of bias and a small number of available studies.

Combined magnetic field results in higher fusion rates than pulsed electromagnetic field bone stimulation after thoracolumbar fusion surgery

BACKGROUND

Bone growth stimulators have been used as an adjunct to spinal fusion surgery in efforts to increase fusion rates.

METHODS

The authors retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent thoracolumbar fusion surgeries by a single surgeon. Patients were then separated into three groups; pulsed electromagnetic field stimulation (PEMF), combined magnetic field stimulation (CMF) or no stimulation (NS), and computed tomography radiographic results at least 1 year after surgery were compared (solid fusion, stable nonunion, and pseudarthrosis).

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients were included; 16 (26.7%) used PEMF, 24 (40.0%) used CMF, and 20 (33.3%) had NS. There were no significant differences in patient demographics. There was no difference in the mean fusion levels (p = 0. 477). Solid fusion was achieved in 11/16 (68.8%) PEMF, 21/24 (87.5%) CMF, and 20/20 (100.0%) NS patients. Stable nonunion was displayed in 2/24 (8.3%) CMF, and zero PEMF and NS patients. There were 5/16 (31.3%) PEMF, 1/24 (4.2%) CMF, and zero NS patients demonstrating radiologic pseudarthrosis. There was a statistically significant difference between PEMF and CMF (p = 0.017) and between PEMF and NS (p = 0.006) groups. No statistical difference was found between CMF and NS (p = 1.000).

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to compare PEMF and CMF bone growth stimulators in patients with degenerative pathologies who underwent thoracolumbar spinal fusions. Overall, the addition of these bone growth stimulators does not improve fusion outcomes, although CMF appears superior to PEMF.

The effect of electrical stimulation therapies on spinal fusion: a cross-disciplinary systematic review and meta-analysis of the preclinical and clinical data

OBJECTIVE

Nonunion is a common complication of spinal fusion surgeries. Electrical stimulation technologies (ESTs)-namely, direct current stimulation (DCS), capacitive coupling stimulation (CCS), and inductive coupling stimulation (ICS)-have been suggested to improve fusion rates. However, the evidence to support their use is based solely on small trials. Here, the authors report the results of meta-analyses of the preclinical and clinical data from the literature to provide estimates of the overall effect of these therapies at large and in subgroups.

METHODS

A systematic review of the English-language literature was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases. The query of these databases was designed to include all preclinical and clinical studies examining ESTs for spinal fusion. The primary endpoint was the fusion rate at the last follow-up. Meta-analyses were performed using a Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation followed by random-effects modeling.

RESULTS

A total of 33 articles (17 preclinical, 16 clinical) were identified, of which 11 preclinical studies (257 animals) and 13 clinical studies (2144 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Among preclinical studies, the mean fusion rates were higher among EST-treated animals (OR 4.79, p < 0.001). Clinical studies similarly showed ESTs to increase fusion rates (OR 2.26, p < 0.001). Of EST modalities, only DCS improved fusion rates in both preclinical (OR 5.64, p < 0.001) and clinical (OR 2.13, p = 0.03) populations; ICS improved fusion in clinical studies only (OR 2.45, p = 0.014). CCS was not effective at increasing fusion, although only one clinical study was identified. A subanalysis of the clinical studies found that ESTs increased fusion rates in the following populations: patients with difficult-to-fuse spines, those who smoke, and those who underwent multilevel fusions.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors found that electrical stimulation devices may produce clinically significant increases in arthrodesis rates among patients undergoing spinal fusion. They also found that the pro-arthrodesis effects seen in preclinical studies are also found in clinical populations, suggesting that findings in animal studies are translatable. Additional research is needed to analyze the cost-effectiveness of these devices.

Effects of Combined Magnetic Fields Treatment and Nano-Hydroxyapatite Coating on Porous Biphasic Calcium Phosphate Bone Graft in Rabbit Spinal Fusion Model

STUDY DESIGN

An animal experimental study was designed to investigate the efficacy of combined magnetic fields (CMF) treatment and nano-hydroxyapatite (HA) coating in the biphasic calcium phosphate (BCP) graft in posterolateral lumbar fusion.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of CMF treatment and nano-HA/BCP and their combination effect in posterolateral lumbar fusion.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Enhancement of artificial bone graft bioeffects could improve spinal fusion outcomes. The bone graft integration is vital in spinal fusion, nano-HA coating, and CMF treatment were reported as effective methods to improve bone graft integration.

METHODS

A bilateral transverse process fusion model was performed on 32 rabbits. The CMF treatment was performed for 30 minutes per day postoperation. The fusion rate, new bone formation, artificial bone graft-autologous bone fusion interface in x-ray and scanning electron microscopy, biomechanics property of fusion rate, histological fusion condition, artificial bone residual rate, and immunohistochemistry assessment of bone morphogenetic protein 2 (BMP-2) and Transforming growth factor beta 1 (TGF-β1) expression were observed at 9th week after surgery.

RESULTS

CMF treatment and nano-HA coating increased the fusion rate, adjusted optical density index, intensity of binding of artificial and autologous bone, bone growth rate, and bending stiffness. CMF treatment also significantly increased BMP-2 and TGF-β1 expression in fusion region while nano-HA coating significantly decreased artificial bone residual rate.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that porous nano-HA/BCP graft could significantly improve spine fusion outcome with excellent bioactivity, biocompatibility and degradability and CMF treatment could significantly improve spine fusion outcome by improving bioactivity and biocompatibility of artificial bone graft in rabbit. Combination of CMF treatment with nano-HA/BCP graft could significantly increase posterolateral lumbar fusion rate in rabbit, which would be a potential strategy for spine fusion preclinical study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A.