Weekly Teriparatide Versus Bisphosphonate for Bone Union During 6 Months After Multi-Level Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Osteoporotic Patients: A Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized Study

Effectiveness of Teriparatide for Spine Fusion in Osteoporotic Patient: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies

OBJECTIVE

Our goal was to assess teriparatide's (TP) effectiveness in improving radiographic and functional outcomes after spinal fusion surgery. This meta-analysis included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative cohort studies. The findings provide valuable insights and guidance for surgeons treating osteoporotic patients undergoing spinal fusion surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review to assess TP's efficacy in spinal fusion surgery for osteoporosis. Through thorough selection, data extraction, and quality assessment, we employed network meta-analysis to evaluate radiographic outcomes (fusion rate, screw loosening, vertebral fracture) and changes in bone mineral density measured by Hounsfield units. Functional outcomes were assessed using the Oswestry Disability Index scales. Our study aims to comprehensively understand TP's impact and effectiveness in spinal fusion surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 868 patients were included in the analysis. All patients underwent thoracolumbar internal fixation fusion surgery and were divided into following 2 groups: the TP treatment group and the control group. The results revealed significant differences in radiological outcomes. The fusion rate showed a significant difference, as well as screw loosening, and bone mineral density measured in Hounsfield units. However, there was no significant difference in vertebral fracture. The TP group demonstrated favorable effects with statistical significance. In terms of functional outcomes, there was no significant difference in the assessment of Oswestry Disability Index scores between the 2 treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The meta-analysis demonstrated that the TP group exhibited significantly better outcomes, particularly in radiological measures, when compared to the control group. The use of TP in spinal fusion surgery shows promise in reducing postoperative complications and providing overall benefits.

Preoperative Optimization: Risk Factors for Perioperative Complications and Preoperative Modification

Adult spinal deformity (ASD) is common and the complication rate in ASD surgery is high due to its invasiveness. There are several factors that increase the risk of complications with ASD surgery. These include age, past medical history, frailty, osteoporosis, or operative invasiveness. Risk factors for perioperative complications can be categorized as modifiable and non-modifiable. The purpose of this article is to present the current available evidence on risk factors for perioperative complications, with a focus on frailty, osteoporosis, surgical site infection prevention, and hip-spine syndrome. In addition, we present the latest evidence for patient-specific surgical risk assessment and surgical planning.

Effects of Perioperative Teriparatide Treatment on the Hounsfield Unit Values at the Upper Instrumented Vertebra in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective single-center study.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the effects of pre and postoperative teriparatide (TPTD) treatment on Hounsfield units (HU) after surgery for adult spinal deformity (ASD).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The most commonly used method for assessing bone mineral density is dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. HU values at the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) have been proposed as a surrogate method for assessing bone quality, particularly in patients with ASD. However, the effect of TPTD treatment on vertebral HU values remains unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We identified 57 consecutive patients with ASD who underwent long-instrumented fusion surgery (>5 vertebrae) between 2014 and 2020. Patients were retrospectively divided into a non-TPTD group (n = 31) and a TPTD group (n = 26). HU measurements were obtained at a level above the UIV (UIV + 1). Changes in the HU value at 1-year postoperatively were compared between the TPTD and non-TPTD groups. The duration of preoperative TPTD was compared between the proximal junctional proximal junctional failure (PJF) and non-PJF groups.

RESULTS

Preoperative HU values were significantly lower in the TPTD group than in the non-TPTD group, despite no significant difference in preoperative bone mineral density of the proximal femur between the two groups. Changes in HU values were significantly higher in the TPTD group than in the non-TPTD group (20.8 ± 15.7% vs -2 ± 10.2%, P < 0.001). In the subanalysis of the TPTD group, the duration of preoperative TPTD treatment was significantly shorter in the PJF group than in the non-PJF group (34.7 ± 16.8 days vs 86.9 ± 34.7 days, P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

Pre and post-operative TPTD treatment increased the average HU value at UIV + 1 by 20.8%. Therefore, more prolonged preoperative TPTD treatment improves bone quality and may help prevent osteoporosis-related complications.

Medical optimization of osteoporosis for adult spinal deformity surgery: a state-of-the-art evidence-based review of current pharmacotherapy

PURPOSE

Osteoporosis is a common, but challenging phenomenon to overcome in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. Several pharmacological agents are at the surgeon's disposal to optimize the osteoporotic patient prior to undergoing extensive reconstruction. Familiarity with these medications will allow the surgeon to make informed decisions on selecting the most appropriate adjuncts for each individual patient.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature review was conducted in PubMed from September 2021 to April 2022. Studies were selected that contained combinations of various terms including osteoporosis, specific medications, spine surgery, fusion, cage subsidence, screw loosening, pull-out, junctional kyphosis/failure.

RESULTS

Bisphosphonates, denosumab, selective estrogen receptor modulators, teriparatide, abaloparatide and romosozumab are all pharmacological agents currently available for adjunctive use. While these medications have been shown to have beneficial effects on improving bone mineral density in the osteoporotic patient, varying evidence is available on their specific effects in the context of extensive spine surgery. There is still a lack of human studies with use of the newer agents.

CONCLUSION

Bisphosphonates are first-line agents due to their low cost and robust evidence behind their utility. However, in the absence of contraindications, optimizing bone quality with anabolic medications should be strongly considered in preparation for spinal deformity surgeries due to their beneficial and favorable effects on fusion and hardware compared to the anti-resorptive medications.

Abaloparatide Enhances Fusion and Bone Formation in a Rabbit Spinal Arthrodesis Model

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective randomized placebo controlled animal trial.

OBJECTIVE

Determine the effect of daily subcutaneous abaloparatide injection on the intervertebral fusion rate in rabbits undergoing posterolateral fusion.

STUDY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Despite the wide utilization of spine fusion, pseudarthrosis remains prevalent, and results in increased morbidity. Abaloparatide is a novel analog of parathyroid hormone-related peptide (1-34) and has shown efficacy in a rat posterolateral spine fusion model to increase fusion rates. The effect of abaloparatide on the fusion rate in a larger animal model remains unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 24 skeletally mature New Zealand White male rabbits underwent bilateral posterolateral spine fusion. Following surgery, the rabbits were randomized to receive either saline as control or abaloparatide subcutaneous injection daily. Specimens underwent manual assessment of fusion, radiographic analysis with both x-ray and high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography, and biomechanical assessment.

RESULTS

Rabbits that received abaloparatide had a 100% (10/10) fusion rate compared with 45% (5/11) for controls ( P <0.02) as assessed by manual palpation. Radiographic analysis determined an overall mean fusion score of 4.17±1.03 in the abaloparatide group versus 3.39±1.21 for controls ( P <0.001). The abaloparatide group also had a greater volume of bone formed with a bone volume of 1209±543 mm 3 compared with 551±152 mm 3 ( P <0.001) for controls. The abaloparatide group had significantly greater trabecular bone volume fraction and trabecular thickness and lower specific bone surface and connectivity density in the adjacent levels when compared with controls. Abaloparatide treatment did not impact trabecular number or separation. There were no differences in biomechanical testing in flexion, extension, or lateral bending ( P >0.05) between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Abaloparatide significantly increased the fusion rate in a rabbit posterolateral fusion model as assessed by manual palpation. In addition, there were marked increases in the radiographic evaluation of fusion.

Best Practice Guidelines for Assessment and Management of Osteoporosis in Adult Patients Undergoing Elective Spinal Reconstruction

STUDY DESIGN

Expert consensus study.

OBJECTIVE

This expert panel was created to establish best practice guidelines to identify and treat patients with poor bone health prior to elective spinal reconstruction.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Currently, no guidelines exist for the management of osteoporosis and osteopenia in patients undergoing spinal reconstructive surgery. Untreated osteoporosis in spine reconstruction surgery is associated with higher complications and worse outcomes.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary panel with 18 experts was assembled including orthopedic and neurological surgeons, endocrinologists, and rheumatologists. Surveys and discussions regarding the current literature were held according to Delphi method until a final set of guidelines was created with over 70% consensus.

RESULTS

Panelists agreed that bone health should be considered in every patient prior to elective spinal reconstruction. All patients above 65 and those under 65 with particular risk factors (chronic glucocorticoid use, high fracture risk or previous fracture, limited mobility, and eight other key factors) should have a formal bone health evaluation prior to undergoing surgery. DXA scans of the hip are preferable due to their wide availability. Opportunistic CT Hounsfield Units of the vertebrae can be useful in identifying poor bone health. In the absence of contraindications, anabolic agents are considered first line therapy due to their bone building properties as compared with antiresorptive medications. Medications should be administered preoperatively for at least 2 months and postoperatively for minimum 8 months.

CONCLUSION

Based on the consensus of a multidisciplinary panel of experts, we propose best practice guidelines for assessment and treatment of poor bone health prior to elective spinal reconstructive surgery. Patients above age 65 and those with particular risk factors under 65 should undergo formal bone health evaluation. We also established guidelines on perioperative optimization, utility of various diagnostic modalities, and the optimal medical management of bone health in this population.Level of Evidence: 5.

Timing of osteoporosis therapies following fracture: the current status

In most patients, osteoporosis is diagnosed only after the occurrence of the first fragility fracture. It is of utmost importance to start osteoporosis medications immediately in these patients to prevent future fractures and also to reduce associated mortality and morbidity. There remains a hesitancy over initiating osteoporotic medications, specifically for antiresorptive agents like bisphosphonates following an acute fracture due to concern over their effect on fracture healing. The purpose of this review is to study the effect of the timing of initiation of different osteoporosis medications on healing after an acute fracture. Most of the human studies, including randomized control trials (RCTs), did not find any significant negative effect on fracture healing with early use of bisphosphonate after an acute fracture. Anabolic agents like teriparatide have shown either neutral or beneficial effects on fracture healing and thus can be started very early following any osteoporotic fracture. Although human studies on the early use of other osteoporosis medications like denosumab or strontium ranelate are very sparse in the literature, none of these medications have shown any evidence of delay in fracture healing. To summarize, among the commonly used anti-osteoporosis agents, both bisphosphonates and teriparatide are safe to be initiated in the early acute post-fracture period. Moreover, teriparatide has shown some evidence in favor of reducing fracture healing time.

Antiresorptive and anabolic medications used in the perioperative period of patients with osteoporosis undergoing spine surgery: their impact on the biology of fusion and systematic review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

Osteoporosis represents the most common metabolic disease of the bone, with an estimated 10% of adults aged 50 years or older affected in the United States. This patient population is at increased risk for spine fracture and instrumentation-related complications after spine surgery. Surgeon knowledge of the available treatments for patients with low bone mineral density (BMD) and how they impact biology of fusion may help mitigate negative effects in the postoperative period. Recombinant parathyroid hormone, which is sold under the name teriparatide, is the most extensively studied bone-protecting agent in humans. Additionally, the success of the monoclonal antibody denosumab has led to further clinical investigations of human patients undergoing spine surgery. Another monoclonal antibody, romosozumab, was recently approved by the US FDA for human use in patients with osteoporosis. Although studies of romosozumab in patients undergoing spine surgery have not been conducted, this is a promising potential therapeutic agent based on its early success in preclinical and clinical trials. Here, the authors aimed to review the mechanisms of action and evidence of use of antiresorptive and anabolic agents in patients with osteoporosis undergoing spine surgery.

METHODS

In accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, a systematic review was conducted to explore the antiresorptive and anabolic agents used in the perioperative period in patients with osteoporosis undergoing spinal surgery. The search was performed by using the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Titles and abstracts were screened and subsequently selected for full review.

RESULTS

The initial search returned 330 articles. Of these articles, 23 final articles were included and reviewed. Many of these articles reported that use of adjuvant agents in the perioperative period improved radiographic evidence of bony fusion and bone fusion rates. These agents tended to improve BMD postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Although antiosteoporosis agents are effective to varying degrees as treatments of patients with low BMD, teriparatide and bisphosphonates have been the most extensively studied with respect to spinal instrumentation. The advent of newer agents represents an area for further exploration, especially due to the current paucity of controlled investigations. It is imperative for spine surgeons to understand the mechanisms of action of these drugs and their effects on biology of fusion.

Effects of Teriparatide on Treatment Outcomes in Osteoporotic Hip and Pelvic Bone Fractures: Meta-analysis and Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

The primary objective of this study was to evaluate randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that have reported the effects of teriparatide on bone-healing in osteoporotic hip and pelvic bone fractures to determine the efficacy of teriparatide in lowering the rate of treatment failure. A total of 2,809 studies were identified using a comprehensive literature search (MEDLINE [n=1,061], Embase [n=1,395], and Cochrane Library n=353]). Five RCTs were included in the final analysis. Treatment failure rates at the last follow-up of osteoporotic hip and pelvic bone fractures between the teriparatide and control groups was the primary outcome. Treatment failure was defined as non-union, varus collapse of the proximal fragment, perforation of the lag screw, and any revision in cases due to mechanical failure of the implant during the follow-up period. The number of treatment failures in the teriparatide and placebo groups were 11.0% (n=20 out of 181) and 17.6% (n=36 out of 205), respectively. Although the rate of treatment failure in the teriparatide group was lower than that in the control group, this difference was not significant (odds ratio, 0.81 [95% confidence interval, 0.42–1.53]; P=0.16; I²=42%). This meta-analysis did not identify any significant differences in the rate of treatment failure between the teriparatide and control groups at final follow-up. Based on these results, we believe that there is a lack of evidence to confirm efficacy of teriparatide in reducing treatment failures in osteoporotic hip and pelvic bone fractures.

Assessment of the efficacy of teriparatide treatment for osteoporosis on lumbar fusion surgery outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Treatment of osteoporosis with medications like teriparatide, a parathyroid hormone, is known to improve bone density and reduce the risk of osteoporotic vertebral fractures. Anecdotal and limited surgical series have described the utility of this treatment for osteoporotic patients prior to spinal fusion surgery, but there is variability in adoption of this strategy as well as consensus regarding optimal treatment duration before and after surgery. In this study, the clinical results of the use of teriparatide for this application are reviewed and critically examined. We conducted a systematic review of electronic databases using different MeSH terms from 1980 to 2020. Pooled and subgroup analyses were performed using fixed and random effect models based upon the heterogeneity (I²). The results were reported as either mean difference (MD) or odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). A total of 771 patients from 12 studies were identified. Three hundred seventy-seven patients (90.8% females) were treated with teriparatide. Lumbar spinal fusion rates were significantly higher among patients who received teriparatide compared to the non-teriparatide group (OR 2.15, 95%CI 1.56-2.97, p < 0.00001). Subgroup analysis revealed that patients receiving teriparatide demonstrated 2.12-fold and 2.23-fold higher likelihood of fusion compared to those in the bisphosphonate (OR 2.12, 95%CI 1.45-3.11, p = 0.0001) and placebo (OR 2.23, 95%CI 1.22-4.08, p = 0.009) cohorts, respectively. The treatment effect of teriparatide was associated with significantly reduced subsequent vertebral fractures (OR 0.16, 95%CI 0.06-0.41, p = 0.0002), sagittal malalignment (MD - 3.85, 95%CI: -6.49 to - 1.21, p = 0.004), limb visual analogue score (VAS) (MD - 0.36, 95%CI - 0.64 to - 0.09, p = 0.008), and spinal VAS (MD - 0.24, 95%CI - 0.44 to - 0.04, p = 0.02) compared to the non-teriparatide group. Patients using teriparatide had 30% less likelihood of screw loosening at last follow-up compared to the non-teriparatide group; however, this was not statistically significant (OR 0.70, 95%CI 0.43-1.14, p = 0.15). There did not exist any statistically significant difference between the two comparative groups in terms of pseudoarthrosis (OR 0.54, 95%CI 0.24-1.21, p = 0.13), cage subsidence (OR 1.30, 95%CI 0.38-4.52, p = 0.68), and bone mineral density (MD 0.04, 95%CI - 0.19-0.29, p = 0.74) at last follow-up examination. This meta-analysis corroborates the effectiveness of teriparatide resulting in higher fusion rates. Further study is required to determine the optimal duration of treatment and timing of surgery.

Pharmacologic considerations in patients with osteoporosis undergoing lumbar interbody fusion: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

As the ageing population continues to grow, the incidence of osteoporosis continues to rise. Patients with osteoporosis are often managed pharmacologically. It is unclear the impact of these medications on osteoporotic patients requiring lumbar interbody fusion, and whether differences exist with respect to patient outcomes among the different medication classes that are often employed. In this systematic review, the authors examine studies evaluating the impact of pharmacologic therapy on osteoporotic patients undergoing lumbar interbody fusion.

METHODS

Using PubMed and MEDLINE databases, the authors conducted a systematic literature review for studies published between 1986 and 2020 following PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 12 articles were ultimately selected. Studies assessing bisphosphonate usage, parathyroid hormone analogues, vitamin D, or combination therapies and their impact on lumbar interbody fusion were included.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence regarding bisphosphonate therapy and improved fusion rates with reduced incidence of complications is inconsistent. While some studies suggest bisphosphonates to confer added benefit, other studies suggest no such improvements despite reduction in bone turnover biomarkers. Teriparatide, on the other hand, consistently demonstrated improved fusion rates and may reduce screw loosening events. In comparison studies against bisphosphonates, teriparatide demonstrates greater potential. A single study reported vitamin D3 to increase fusion rates, although more studies are needed to validate this finding. It is important to note that these benefits are only demonstrated in single-level fusion, with multi-level fusions not being significantly enhanced by teriparatide therapy. Combination therapy with denosumab further augment fusion rates. Further prospective randomized controlled trials are necessary before standardized recommendations regarding pharmacological intervention in patients undergoing LIF can be made.