ReviewGlobal spine journal2024
Efficacy and Outcome Measurement of iFactor/ABM/P-15 in Lumbar Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review.
Review in Global spine journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- i-Factor™ Bone Graft Versus Demineralized Bone Matrix for Single-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Comparable Fusion Response, but Increased Inflammatory Response, withJournal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- One-year CT evaluation of fusion in adult spinal deformity using supplemental anterior lumbar interbody fusion.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Article
- Two-Year Radiological Fusion Outcomes Following Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion Using Banana-Shaped Interbody Cages.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Transforming spinal surgery with innovations in biologics and additive manufacturing.Materials today. Bio · 2025Review
- Advances in growth factor-containing 3D printed scaffolds in orthopedics.Biomedical engineering online · 2025Review
- The Future of Bone Repair: Emerging Technologies and Biomaterials in Bone Regeneration.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- The Osteogenic Peptide P-15 for Bone Regeneration: A Narrative Review of the Evidence for a Mechanism of Action.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Bioinspired synthetic peptide-based biomaterials regenerate bone through biomimicking of extracellular matrix.Journal of tissue engineeringReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designSystematic Review.
objectivesTo determine the efficacy and overall outcomes of iFactor/ABM/P-15 following lumbar spine surgery.
methodsWe performed a search of the Cochrane Library, Medline Ovid, PubMed, and SCOPUS databases from inception until August 2023. Eligible studies included outcomes of patients receiving iFactor following lumbar spine surgery. The primary outcomes of interest were fusion rates and iFactor efficacy after lumbar surgery in patients who received iFactor. Secondary outcomes included patient-reported outcomes and complication rates.
resultsA total of 766 titles were initially screened. After inclusion criteria were applied, 5 studies (388 patients) were included, which measured overall outcomes of iFactor/ABM/P-15 following lumbar spine surgery. These studies showed acceptable reliability for inclusion based on the Methodical Index for Non-Randomized studies and Critical Appraisal Skills Programme assessment tools. iFactor/ABM/P-15 facilitated significantly faster bone development in various procedures while maintaining favorable clinical outcomes compared to traditional grafts.
conclusionsThis systematic review found that iFactor/ABM/P-15 use for lumbar spine surgery maintains similar managing patient-reported outcomes relative to other grafting methods. In regard to rates of fusion, iFactor/ABM/P-15 showed a significantly faster rate of fusion when compared to traditional grafts including allograft, autograft, demineralized bone matrix (DBM), and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2). Future multicenter randomized control trials with larger sample sizes are recommended to further assess iFactor/ABM/P-15 efficacy in lumbar spine surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.