ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2024
Initial clinical evaluation of a novel integrative bone matrix (IBM) in foot and ankle fusion procedures.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFoot and ankle arthrodesis procedures are frequently performed in concert with the utilization of bone grafts. However, the availability of autologous bone is often limited, inaccessible, or not suitable, thus there is a need for bone graft substitutes with equally effective clinical outcomes. A next generation integrative bone matrix (IBM) has been developed that has intrinsic osteogenic, osteoconductive, and osteoinductive characteristics, and is a promising solution to mitigate complications such as nonunion and reduce the need for autologous bone graft harvest.
methodsThe charts of twenty subjects undergoing foot and ankle fusion procedures with INFLUX™ SPARC, a novel IBM, were retrospectively reviewed to determine initial clinical safety and efficacy of this next generation bone graft. Endpoints included the presence of complications or surgical reintervention, fusion rates as determined by standardized radiographic films, and patient-reported outcome measures at various time points up to 24 weeks.
resultsNo major complications or surgical reinterventions were observed in this study. Complete radiographic fusion was achieved in all subjects by 24 weeks, with a mean overall fusion time of 8.5 ± 4.8 weeks. Subjective pain, function, and quality of life outcomes showed consistent improvements throughout the follow-up period, and all subjects (100%) achieved the minimum clinically significant mean improvements for all measures by week 24.
conclusionsThis study supports the use of this new IBM as a promising alternative to autologous bone grafting, offering high fusion success rates, low complications, and clinically meaningful improvements in patient-reported outcomes, particularly in higher-risk patient populations. Future investigations are needed to confirm these findings in larger and longer-term studies, and to explore the broader applications of this innovative bone graft.
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.