TY - JOUR T1 - Predictive Factors and Rates of Fusion in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Utilizing rhBMP-2 or Mesenchymal Stem Cells JF - International Journal of Spine Surgery JO - Int J Spine Surg SP - 46 LP - 52 DO - 10.14444/6007 VL - 13 IS - 1 AU - SAMUEL C. OVERLEY AU - STEVEN J. MCANANY AU - MUHAMMAD A. ANWAR AU - ROBERT K. MERRILL AU - ANDREW LOVY AU - JAVIER Z. GUZMAN AU - SERGEY ZHADANOV AU - AMISH DOSHI AU - EDWARD ROTHENBERG AU - AVANI VAISHNAV AU - CATHERINE GANG AU - SHEERAZ A. QURESHI Y1 - 2019/02/01 UR - http://ijssurgery.com//content/13/1/46.abstract N2 - Background: Several fusion adjuncts exist to enhance fusion rates during minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF). The objective of this study was to compare fusion rates in patients undergoing MI-TLIF with either rhBMP-2 or cellularized bone matrix (CBM).Methods: We conducted a single surgeon retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent MI-TLIF with either rhBMP-2 or CBM placed in an interbody cage. Single and multilevel procedures were included. Fusion was assessed on computed tomography scans at 12-month follow-up by an independent, blinded, board-certified neuroradiologist. Fusion rates and rate of revision surgery were compared with a Fisher exact test between the 2 groups. A multivariate regression analysis was performed to identify patient factors that were predictive of radiographic nonunion after MI-TLIF.Results: A total of 93 fusion levels in 78 patients were reviewed. Thirty-nine patients received CBM, and 39 patients received rhBMP-2. The patients receiving rhBMP-2 were older on average (61.4 vs 55.6, P = .03). The overall fusion rate was 68% in the CBM group (32/47 levels) and 78% in the rhBMP-2 group (36/46) (P = .35). Only preoperative hypertension was predictive of radiographic nonunion (odds ratio = 3.5, P = .05). There were 3 smokers in the CBM group and 4 smokers in the BMP group, and 1 in each group experienced radiographic pseudarthrosis. A total of 4 patients, 3 in the CBM group and 1 in the BMP group (P = .61), required revision for symptomatic pseudarthrosis. All of these patients had a single-level index procedure.Conclusions: There were no differences in radiographic fusion and rate of revision surgery in patients who underwent MI-TLIF with either rhBMP-2 or CBM as fusion adjuncts.Level of Evidence: 3Clinical Relevance: Both rhBMP-2 and CBMs can be used as effective fusion adjuncts without any clear advantage of one over the other. ER -