Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Pediatric spinal fusions have been associated with nonunion rates of approximately 25%, putting patients at risk for neurological complications while simultaneously incurring significant costs for revision surgery. In an effort to decrease nonunion rates, various bone grafts and biologics have been developed to increase osseous formation and arthrosis. The current gold-standard bone graft is autologous bone taken from the iliac crest or ribs, but this procedure is associated with significant morbidity and postoperative pain due to an additional graft harvesting procedure. Other bone graft substitutes and biologics include allografts, demineralized bone matrix, bone morphogenetic protein, and bioactive glass. Ultimately, these substitutes have been studied more extensively in the adult population, and there is a paucity of strong evidence for the use of these agents within the pediatric population. In this review, the authors will discuss in detail the characteristics of the various bone graft substitutes, their fusion efficacy, and their safety profile in this subpopulation.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.3171/2021.3.FOCUS2148 | DOI Listing |