Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2020 Aug;13(4):530-536.
doi: 10.1007/s12178-020-09651-x.

Ceramic Biologics for Bony Fusion-a Journey from First to Third Generations

Brandon Ortega  1 , Carson Gardner  1 , Sidney Roberts  1 , Andrew Chung  1 , Jeffrey C Wang  1 , Zorica Buser  2
Affiliations
Review

Ceramic Biologics for Bony Fusion-a Journey from First to Third Generations

Brandon Ortega et al. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2020 Aug.

Abstract

Purpose of review: To provide information on characteristics and use of various ceramics in spine fusion and future directions.

Recent findings: In most recent years, focus has been shifted to the use of ceramics in minimally invasive surgeries or implementation of nanostructured surface modification features to promote osteoinductive properties. In addition, effort has been placed on the development of bioactive synthetics. Core characteristic of bioactive synthetics is that they undergo change to simulate a beneficial response within the bone. This change is based on chemical reaction and various chemical elements present in the bioactive ceramics. Recently, a synthetic 15-amino acid polypeptide bound to an anorganic bone material which mimics the cell-binding domain of type-I collagen opened a possibility for osteogenic and osteoinductive roles of this hybrid graft material. Ceramics have been present in the spine fusion arena for several decades; however, their use has been limited. The major obstacle in published literature is small sample size resulting in low evidence and a potential for bias. In addition, different physical and chemical properties of various ceramics further contribute to the limited evidence. Although ceramics have several disadvantages, they still hold a great promise as a value-based graft material with being easily available, relatively inexpensive, and non-immunogenic.

Keywords: Beta-tricalcium phosphate; Bioactive; Ceramics; Hydroxyapatite; Spine fusion; Synthetics.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

No conflicts of interest for the current study. Disclosures outside of submitted work: Brandon Ortega, Carson Gardner, Sidney Roberts, and Andrew Chung have no disclosures. Jeffrey Wang: royalties—Biomet, Seaspine, Amedica, DePuy Synthes; investments/options—Bone Biologics, Pearldiver, Electrocore, Surgitech; board of directors—North American Spine Society, AO Foundation (20,000 honorariums for board position, plus travel for board meetings), Cervical Spine Research Society; editorial boards—Spine, the Spine Journal, Clinical Spine Surgery, Global Spine Journal; fellowship funding (paid directly to institution)—AO Foundation. Zorica Buser: consultancy—Cerapedics, The Scripps Research Institute, Xenco Medical (past), AO Spine (past); research support—SeaSpine (past, paid to the institution), Next Science (paid directly to institution), Motion Metrics (paid directly to institution); North American Spine Society—committee member; Lumbar Spine Society—co-chair research committee; AOSpine Knowledge Forum Degenerative—associate member; AOSNA Research Committee—committee member.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Pros and cons of ceramics—first to third generations
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Buser Z, Ortega B, D’Oro A, Pannell W, Cohen JR, Wang J, et al. Spine degenerative conditions and their treatments: national trends in the United States of America. Glob Spine J. 2018;8(1):57–67. doi: 10.1177/2192568217696688. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. John J, Mirahmadizadeh A, Seifi A. Association of insurance status and spinal fusion usage in the United States during two decades. J Clin Neurosci. 2018;51:80–84. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2018.02.013. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gruskay JA, Basques BA, Bohl DD, Webb ML, Grauer JN. Short-term adverse events, length of stay, and readmission after iliac crest bone graft for spinal fusion. Spine. 2014;39(20):1718–1724. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000476. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Tay BK, Patel VV, Bradford DS. Calcium sulfate and calcium phosphate-based bone substitutes. Mimicry of the mineral phase of bone. Orthop Clin North Am. 1999;30:615–623. doi: 10.1016/S0030-5898(05)70114-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Vaz K, Verma K, Protopsaltis T, Schwab F, Lonner B, Errico T. Bone grafting options for lumbar spine surgery: a review examining clinical efficacy and complications. SAS J. 2010;4(3):75–86. doi: 10.1016/j.esas.2010.01.004. - DOI - PMC - PubMed