| Home | E-Submission | Sitemap | Editorial Office |  
top_img
Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society > Volume 68(6); 2025 > Article
Lee, Youn, Park, and Hyun: Low-Dose Bone Morphogenetic Protein Use in Spinal Fusion : Rethinking Clinical Efficacy

Abstract

In spinal fusion surgery, autogenous bone grafting remains the gold standard for achieving optimal bone fusion; however, challenges such as donor site morbidity and limited graft availability have prompted active research into alternative options. Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) exhibits excellent osteoinductive properties. Using rhBMP-2 was anticipated to promote early and effective fusion, particularly in challenging surgical scenarios involving elderly patients, those with low bone density, or individuals with multiple comorbidities, although in these populations, the biological response to rhBMP-2 may be attenuated and the risk of complications increased. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the development, characteristics, and dose-related adverse reactions of rhBMP-2 in spinal fusion, based on extensive clinical and experimental findings. Factors contributing to the decline in rhBMP-2 usage are also discussed. Furthermore, this review proposes a safer carrier with reduced rhBMP-2 doses to optimize delivery and minimize complications. Emphasis is placed on the critical role of carriers in improving bioavailability control, minimizing side effects, and better aligning with natural bone healing processes.

INTRODUCTION

Spinal fusion surgery is a common procedure aimed at reversing unstable or destabilized spinal segments to achieve a solid, fused construct. It helps to achieve the desired postoperative outcomes, including improved functional status and reduced lumbar pain or sciatica (i.e., axial and radicular pain, respectively) [34,36]. However, the fusion rate of posterior lumbar fusion (PLF) has stagnated at 88-95%, and approximately 10% of patients still suffer from nonunion [60]. Moreover, the presence of multiple comorbidities or undetected iatrogenic damage to the remaining bone—particularly endplate injuries caused during disc preparation—may compromise fusion outcomes by increasing the risk of cage subsidence and failure of indirect decompression [52]. This often requires the use of autologous bone grafts or advanced graft substitutes to achieve successful fusion. Although autogenous bone grafting is considered the gold standard for optimal bone fusion, complications, such as prolonged donor site morbidity [24] and limited availability, have spurred active research to find viable alternatives.
Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2) exhibits excellent osteoinductive properties. Various proteins in the BMP family serve different functions, with BMP-2 particularly involved in osteogenesis by inducing stem cells to differentiate into an osteogenic lineage. BMP-2 first gained recognition in 1965 when Marshall R. Urist [62] reported that demineralized, lyophilized bone segments induced new bone formation in rabbit muscle pouches. This phenomenon remained relatively obscure until the advent of rhBMP-2, a product of genetic engineering. Since its market release in 2002, it has become widely adopted in clinical settings in combination products, particularly in anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) and PLF, with clinical outcomes reported from various centres worldwide. These findings have led researchers to prioritize the identification of bone grafts or substitutes with osteoinductive rather than conventional osteoconductive properties. This approach would ensure early solid fusion and overcome the challenges in complex surgical environments, increasingly characterized by advanced patient age, high rates of suboptimal bone mineral density and multiple comorbidities.
This review provides a comprehensive overview of the chronological development of rhBMP-2 in spinal fusion surgery, with a focus on its biological properties, the evolution of delivery carrier systems, changes in clinical usage patterns, dose titration strategies, and the associated dose-related adverse reactions impacting fusion outcomes. The aim is to better understand how rhBMP-2 applications have evolved over time in response to clinical demands and safety considerations, and to propose directions for optimizing its use in spinal fusion procedures.

METHODS

A narrative review was performed to systematically explore the literature regarding the historical development, biological characteristics, delivery modalities, evolving clinical applications, and dose adjustment strategies of rhBMP-2 in spinal fusion surgery, with particular attention to dose-related complications influencing fusion outcomes. A PubMed search was performed combining the following keywords in various ways : “Bone morphogenetic protein,” “rhBMP-2,” “dose,” “dosage,” “lumbar fusion,” “interbody fusion,” “Infuse,” “InductOs” and “Novosis.”
Articles were selected according to the following considerations : 1) to focus on the most relevant clinical applications of rhBMP-2, studies of other recombinant forms of BMP, such as rhBMP-7, were excluded from this review. 2) We excluded studies involving non-spinal surgery, such as trauma and dental procedures, but did not restrict inclusion based on the operative approach. And 3) a search of published reports was conducted using PubMed, and additional information from the public domain regarding the InfuseTM and NovosisTM products was also considered. The sources for product-specific information included the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Summary of Safety and Effectiveness, the Instructions for Use, and promotional materials. CG Bio Co., Ltd. (Seoul, Korea) explicitly granted permission to include their materials in this review (Figs. 1 and 2). We acknowledge that some proprietary material used in this review is not publicly available and therefore not included in the reference list; it has been included here to ensure transparency and appropriate citation. To minimize bias in product-specific documents, only objective data related to product characteristics were used where possible.

CHRONOLOGY

Dr. Marshall R. Urist, in his original 1965 publication, demonstrated that a substance he found in demineralized bone matrix (DBM) derived from human cadaveric bone could induce new bone formation when implanted into a non-bony site (abdominal muscle pouch) in animals [62]. He later termed to substance BMP [63]. The clinical use of BMP was initially restricted because the only source at the time was donor bone, with limited availability [27]. Advances in molecular biology in the 1980s and early 1990s allowed the sequencing of BMPs, and the first version of rhBMP-2 was cloned in 1988 by a team led by John Wozney [67]. This milestone in sequencing technology made large-scale production of rhBMP-2 possible, enabling comprehensive experimental testing and subsequently transforming rhBMP-2 from an anecdotal scientific discovery into a widely adopted therapeutic agent in orthopedics, dentistry and regenerative medicine.
The early stages of rhBMP-2 development demonstrated that localized retention and sustained release of the agent improved bone formation at an equivalent dose [27]. Throughout product development, research has assessed numerous carriers that promote surface attachment, enhance retention and thereby enable the sustained release of rhBMP-2. InfuseTM Bone Graft (Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Memphis, TN, USA) is a combination product containing rhBMP-2 delivered on an absorbable collagen sponge (ACS). It was launched in 2002 (marketed as InductOsTM in Europe). The FDA approved a combination product (InfuseTM Bone Graft) containing rhBMP-2/ACS for single-level ALIF procedures with a titanium tapered cage [18]. The InfuseTM Bone Graft was approved in various pack sizes, each with an rhBMP-2 dose concentration of 1.5 mg/mL. Further supplemental approvals to expand its use were granted by July 2004. These included the Inter FixTM Threaded Fusion Device and InterFixTM RP Threaded Fusion Device (LT-CAGETM or Inter Fix fusion device; Medtronic Sofamor Danek), which expanded its application from L4-S1 to L2-S1 and enabled use in patients with retrolisthesis in conjunction with degenerative disc disease.
Following FDA approval, the initial clinical adoption of rhBMP-2/ACS was rapid, quickly establishing it as the leading bone graft substitute product in the United States. Several initial studies reported excellent fusion rates with surface-attached rhBMP-2/ACS, with reduced operative time, lower blood loss, decreased length of hospital stay, and the avoidance of second-site morbidity compared to traditional autologous iliac crest bone grafting (ICBG) [8,9,11]. Usage grew at a compound annual growth rate of 69% between 2002 and 2010, from less than 1% to 29% of total fusion procedures [33]. However, Ong et al. [46] reported that at least 85% of rhBMP-2/ACS usage was off-label between 2002 and 2007. Despite significant controversy regarding its off-label implementations other than ALIF procedures, it still retains as the market-leading bone graft substitute globally. However, since InfuseTM Bone Graft is currently the only FDA-approved rhBMP-2 product, our understanding of the agent in the clinical and radiological contexts has been largely influenced by its delivery via ACS, rather than by studies focusing solely on its inherent biological and chemical properties.

Inherent biological properties of rhBMP-2 and need for carrier protection

With this chronological background, rhBMP-2 has been adopted as a clinical alternative to autologous bone grafting. It is widely recognized that the amount of new bone formation correlates with the dose of rhBMP-2 administered up to a certain threshold [66]. Studies have shown a linear relationship between dose and bone formation up to a dose threshold, beyond which it reaches a plateau with no additional bone formation [66]. In nonhuman primates, the dose-response curve is much steeper compared to other experimental models, necessitating higher doses to achieve successful fusion [42]. For example, 0.2-0.4 mg/mL rhBMP-2 would be sufficiently osteoinductive in rodents, while sheep or other primates need higher concentrations of 0.43 and 0.75-1.5 mg/mL, respectively [3,5]. The selection of the 1.5 mg/mL concentration for the initial human clinical trial of ALIF was based on the therapeutic range of 0.4-1.5 mg/mL rhBMP-2 in nonhuman primates for this indication. This concentration is currently approved by the FDA for human use (InfuseTM Bone Graft) [18].
rhBMP-2 has a short half-life in the body when applied alone, is quickly eliminated, and loses its biological activity rapidly in vivo. To assess the extent and duration of systemic exposure to rhBMP-2, studies were conducted to characterize the pharmacokinetics of rhBMP-2 protein in the blood of rats and monkeys [18]. Following intravenous administration, rhBMP-2 was rapidly cleared from the systemic circulation via renal excretion in rats and nonhuman primates (t½ = 16 minutes in rats and t½ = 6.7 minutes in nonhuman primates) [18]. The lack of reports of systemic toxicity may be related to this rapid systemic clearance of rhBMP-2. Therefore, a delivery carrier system is essential to modulate the pharmacokinetic properties of rhBMP-2. Carriers for rhBMP-2 can increase protein retention at the treatment site for a sufficient period to allow regenerative, tissue-forming cells to migrate to the injured area, proliferate and differentiate. The carrier can also serve as a matrix for cell infiltration and maintain a space or volume for new bone formation. For example, applying rhBMP-2 with an ACS to subcutaneous or orthopedic sites in rats and rabbits extended the mean local residence time to up to 8 days [18]. The representative rhBMP-2-containing product approved by the Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) in Korea is NovosisTM (CG Bio Co., Ltd.). In a promotional brochure for NovosisTM, CG Bio Co., Ltd., highlighted the rapid systemic clearance of rhBMP-2, similar to that of the InfuseTM Bone Graft, as shown in Fig. 1.

Need for an ideal rhBMP-2 delivery carrier

Optimizing the therapeutic application of rhBMP-2 depends on localized, sustained release, which relies on a safe and well-characterized carrier system. The development of effective carrier systems is indispensable not only for enhancing the therapeutic efficacy of rhBMP-2 but also for enabling the safe and effective application of low-dose BMP-2, thereby minimizing dose-dependent adverse effects. Various types of carriers have been developed and recommended for optimal rhBMP-2 delivery [1]. Scaffolds for bone regeneration must meet essential requirements related to their ability to bind and release growth factors. To be clinically relevant, scaffolds should ideally occupy the intended space, be composed of biocompatible and osteoconductive materials and have mechanical properties suitable for the implantation site. They should also have a three-dimensional structure that supports cell metabolism, be manufactured efficiently, allow for secure fixation in the surgical site, degrade over a suitable time frame, and promote cell migration into the construct [35]. Previously studied rhBMP-2 carriers can be divided into three categories [1] : polymers (natural or synthetic), ceramics and ceramic/polymer composites. Each category possesses structural features that facilitate rhBMP-2 loading and delivery (Fig. 2). Currently, there is no ideal carrier that fulfils all the requirements necessary for clinical applications.
Despite its suboptimal biomechanical properties, ACS is the only carrier approved for use with rhBMP-2 in the United States owing to its high biocompatibility, biodegradability and low immunogenicity [19,20,29,49]. The primary clinical administrations of rhBMP-2 involved the use of ACS made from bovine type I collagen obtained from the deep flexor (Achilles) tendon. Previous studies have shown that ACS scaffolds facilitate effective cell infiltration, which may be a crucial factor in inducing new bone formation [19]. Release of rhBMP-2 incorporated within ACS is believed to occur through two primary mechanisms : first, desorption of proteins bound to the scaffold, and second, diffusion and/or convection of proteins that do not interact with the scaffold. However, rhBMP-2 easily detaches from the binding site because of its limited affinity for collagen. In addition, most of the unbound rhBMP-2 present within the pores of the collagen sponge is released in the early implantation stage [28,36]. Furthermore, collagen sponges generally degrade quickly in vivo, resulting in disruption of the structural integrity needed for the retention and release of rhBMP-2 before bone is fully regenerated. Pharmacokinetic studies using a rat ectopic assay investigated the in vivo retention and release of rhBMP-2 from ACS. The results showed an initial rapid loss of rhBMP-2 within hours of implantation, followed by a more gradual loss [28]. In preclinical studies and clinical practice, spinal fusion using rhBMP-2 with ACS has achieved high fusion rates but has been associated with several complications, including inflammatory reactions, spinal neuropathy, osteolysis and urogenital disorders [2,30,31,58]. These are thought to be caused by an initial uncontrolled, burst-like release of rhBMP-2, which may exceed physiological levels by more than 106 times [17,22,68]. Half of the rhBMP-2 injected over the ACS was released within the first couple of days [39]. Due to its limited mechanical integrity, the ACS carrier cannot withstand compressive forces, which may exacerbate the uncontrolled, burst-like release of rhBMP-2, especially when sponge-wrapped rhBMP-2 is subjected to compressive deformation by external pressure. Moreover, collagen sponges degrade rapidly, raising skepticism about their effectiveness as an ideal carrier, particularly in providing the structured 3D scaffold at the target sites for osteogenesis. Consequently, strategies to suppress the initial burst release while extending/prolonging the sustained release period have been proposed and widely recognized. Such approaches aim to reduce clinical complications and promote the recruitment of stem cells to the bone healing site [6,12,58].
Several materials with robust biomechanical properties, including resistance to compression and high affinity for rhBMP-2, have been investigated for applications in bone healing. Calcium phosphate ceramics like bone minerals (notably hydroxyapatite, HA) are used as rhBMP-2 carriers because of their osteoconductive properties and environmentally sensitive binding capabilities. rhBMP-2 is not only ‘ab’sorbed by the scaffold, but also ‘ad’sorbed through a noncovalent bond on HA surfaces. HA typically exists as granules and has porosity with interconnected pores, similar to cancellous bone. It also has a large surface area for rhBMP-2 adsorption. The increased surface area enables increased rhBMP-2 loading efficiencies. Molecular simulations and experimental results have shown that rhBMP-2 adsorption onto the HA surface involves electrostatic attraction and hydrogen bonding, which are time-dependent [16]. In one study, over 80% of the total rhBMP-2 adsorbed rapidly during the first minutes of exposure to HA [59,69]. Additionally, HA facilitates new bone formation by gradually releasing ions such as calcium and phosphorus when introduced into the body. rhBMP-2 also has a high affinity for HA, which enables sustained release [25,45]. The affinity of rhBMP-2 for HA has been measured to be 2.4-230×105 M-1 [7]. NovosisTM, which was approved for use in posterolateral fusion by Korea’s MFDS in 2017, is a representative product that utilizes HA granules as a carrier for rhBMP-2.
Recently, ceramic and polymer composites have gained considerable attention as delivery systems for rhBMP-2. The final formulation of the composite carrier is designed as a gel or putty, addressing the structural limitations of ACS and granule-type ceramic carriers and providing the flexibility required to meet various clinical needs. Numerous composites have been developed for in vivo delivery of rhBMP-2 for bone regeneration [1]. For example, a putty carrier combining HA granules with β-tricalcium phosphate (TCP) poloxamer hydrogel combines the advantages of both polymer and ceramic carriers. This composite carrier could easily fill the space within the intervertebral cage without leaving a gap, enabling sustained release of rhBMP-2. When in vitro elease kinetics were compared using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, most (78.4% of the initial load) of the rhBMP-2 loaded on ACS was released by day 24, and the majority of this release occurred during the 1-7 days interval, whereas in the composite carrier group, significantly greater amounts of rhBMP-2 were released during the 7-14 and 14-24 days intervals. When in vivo release kinetics were compared using fluorescently labelled rhBMP-2, the biological half-life of rhBMP-2 delivered through the composite carrier was longer than that of ACS. In addition, rhBMP-2 delivered through the composite carrier induced a higher level of osteogenic gene expression than that of ACS, and the quantity and quality of new bone formation were also superior in a rat spinal fusion model [57]. Composite carriers were able to control the spatial release of rhBMP-2 more efficiently than ACS. In a rat caudal intervertebral fusion model, two doses of rhBMP-2 were loaded into ACS and a composite carrier : a high dose of 10 μg and low dose of 3 μg. Micro-CT results after 6 weeks showed that the interbody fusion rate was significantly higher in the composite carrier group (both doses, 87.5%) compared to the ACS group (low dose, 50%; high dose, 62.5%). In the composite carrier group, new bone formation was confined to the intervertebral disc spaces, whereas in the ACS group, ectopic bone formation was observed outside the intervertebral disc spaces. The composite carrier group demonstrated superior new bone quality, with abundant thick trabecular bone, compared to the ACS group, which primarily exhibited fatty bone marrow. In the composite carrier group, soft tissue swelling remained unchanged with varying doses. In contrast, the ACS group showed a significant increase in swelling in the high-dose group compared to the low-dose group [44]. Another study reported on collagen/HA composite carriers used to deliver rhBMP- 2. The injectable carrier system composed of polylactic acid (PLA)-polyethylene glycol (PEG) block copolymer (7 : 3 ratio) demonstrated improved bone mineral density compared to an identical carrier with the same polymer but a different molecular weight at an equivalent ratio [51]. In another approach, calcium- HA bioceramics are combined with a PLA : PEG block copolymer (51 : 49 ratio) to promote rhBMP-2 activity. It has been found that 5 mg rhBMP-2 is sufficient to induce complete healing of critical-sized radial defects in rabbit [32]. Although many carrier systems have demonstrated acceptable limits of protein delivery, further investigation is actively underway to identify the ideal carrier for BMP-2 with the lowest required dose and fewest adverse reactions to maximize bone repair. Ceramic or ceramic/polymer composite carriers that are osteoconductive and allow sustained release of rhBMP-2 rather than an initial burst release are clinically utilized as alternative carriers to replace ACS. Table 1 summarizes the differences in the characteristics of ACS and ceramic or ceramic composite carriers.

Impact of clinical rhBMP-2 doses on reported controversies and complications

Industry-sponsored trials of InfuseTM before approval showed a trend of increasing rhBMP-2 dose over time, reflecting the prevailing philosophy that higher doses lead to better outcomes. rhBMP-2/ACS enabled volume-dependent dose control of rhBMP-2, contingent upon the degree of underfilling or overfilling. In the early InfuseTM ALIF studies, the total dose of rhBMP-2 per level progressively increased from 3.9-7.8 mg to 4.2-12 mg [64]. Studies highlighting the adverse reactions of rhBMP-2, which had not been reported in earlier research, began to emerge in 2006 [10,43,48,53].
However, despite involving approximately 600 patients, previous industry-sponsored trial publications consistently reported adverse events associated with the investigational device. In 2011, Carragee et al. [12] published a critical review indicating that the complication rate for spinal surgery using rhBMP-2/ACS ranged from 20% to 70%. Accordingly, United States Senate Finance Committee staff investigated Medtronic’s involvement in the InfuseTM study. They found that Medtronic significantly contributed to drafting and editing articles written by its physician consultants, paid the authors and advised against publishing a complete list of adverse events linked to InfuseTM [61]. This reporting omission likely contributed to the extensive use of high-dose rhBMP-2. Amidst the controversy, the Yale Open Data Access (YODA) project conducted two systematic reviews and meta-analyses to comprehensively assess rhBMP-2/ACS’s safety. The analysis results from the YODA project showed that rhBMP-2 had a higher complication rate than ICBG in anterior cervical fusion surgery, whereas ICBG and rhBMP-2 were equally effective in thoracolumbar surgeries, such as ALIF and PLF. There was a trend toward more adverse events associated with rhBMP-2, yet the data were insufficient to draw definitive conclusions. While the use of rhBMP-2 has been associated with an increased risk of cancer, the incidence and absolute risk remain small. The heterogeneity of cancer types raises questions about the validity of this association. In addition, data on retrograde ejaculation and heterotopic bone formation were not collected [21,54]. The response to these findings precipitated two major shifts in clinical practice: reduction in use and reduction in dose of rhBMP-2.

Reduction in use of rhBMP-2

A report investigating rhBMP-2 utilization trends using the largest inpatient administrative database in the United States revealed that the use of rhBMP-2 in spinal fusion surgeries increased from 0.7% in 2002 to 29.5% in 2010 then gradually declined to 14.7% of all fusion surgeries in 2015, which paralleled and reflected growing concerns about clinical safety [33]. In another retrospective database study, the use of rhBMP-2 in thoracolumbar fusion surgeries across the United States increased from 28.3% in 2004 to 47.0% in 2008 before steadily declining to 23.6% in 2014 [4]. There was also a marked change in the type of fusion using rhBMP-2. The rate of rhBMP-2 use decreased from 23.1% in 2006 to 12.0% in 2015, with the largest decreases observed in anterior cervical fusions (from 7.5% to 3.1%), posterior cervical fusions (from 17.0% to 8.3%) and PLFs (from 31.5% to 15.8%) [65]. Also, the use of rhBMP-2 in patient groups with a low risk-benefit ratio, such as younger patients and primary surgery patients, has also tended to decrease. Despite a decline in lumbar fusion surgeries following the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of rhBMP-2 in all spinal fusion surgeries was 16% in 2019 and is projected to increase to 20% by 2022 [64]. Although these inconsistent decremental trends may be reversed in the future, these cumulative data and statistical analyses provide insights into the correlation between the trends and the technology’s safety and efficacy profile in contemporary clinical practice.

Evidence-based rationale for rhBMP-2 dose reduction

Despite anecdotal reports of dose-dependent adverse reactions in previous studies, rhBMP-2 has been widely used off-label without a standardized dosage. Upon its initial development and commercial release, the rhBMP-2 dose was intended to be volume-dependent, with its volume equalling the internal volume of the cage [15]. As noted above, controlling the availability of rhBMP-2 signals at the cell surface is crucial for progressive and delayed peak expression during human bone healing, as well as for preventing dysregulated cell signalling [23]. Overfilling graft sites with high doses of rhBMP-2/ACS was associated with significant short-term osteoclastic activity, leading to bone resorption. A hypothesized mechanism for the promotion of osteolytic activity by rhBMP-2 confined within the interbody cage is that the geometry of the cage window limits rhBMP-2 diffusion, sustaining a higher concentration, or the mechanical pressure placed over the endplates by the cage induces bone remodelling through Wolff’s law [2,58]. However, the absence of guidelines or recommendations has led to substantial dose variability in the published literature, ranging from 4.2 mg to 40 mg per level [5,15,23,55]. Meanwhile, the designated concentration of commercially available rhBMP-2 has been standardized at 1.5 mg/mL, regardless of bioavailability and package size, thus adjustment of the total applied dose may have to rely on the number of carrier blocks used. Although the standardized concentration remains the same at 1.5 mg/mL, recent commercial formulations of rhBMP-2 for ACS also provide a lower dose of 1.05 mg. In an effort to reduce adverse reactions, clinicians have gradually decreased the total implant volume, which in turn has led to reduction in the total rhBMP-2 dose per level over time. A current clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier : NCT04073563) is evaluating the efficacy of 2.1 or 4.2 mg rhBMP-2 per level compared to autologous bone in TLIF for one-and two-level fusions.
A longitudinal study in 1209 patients who received rhBMP-2/ACS between 2006 and 2020 demonstrated a significant decrease in the rhBMP-2 dose used per level over time. Of these, posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF)/transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and PLF demonstrated a significant decrease in the rhBMP-2 dose used per level, with major transitions seen in 2018, 2011, and 2013, respectively. In particular, PLIF/TLIF demonstrated the most significant dose reduction, with the average dose per level decreasing from 5.97 mg in 2009 to 4.09 mg in 2011, 2.36 mg in 2012, and 1.35 mg in 2020. In addition, the rhBMP-2 dose per level was identified as a significant predictor of complications following spinal fusion [14].
Research has focused on identifying the minimum effective dose (MED) of rhBMP-2 that optimizes fusion rates while minimizing complications. A quantitative exploratory meta-analysis of 48 studies involving 5890 patients analysed the dose-dependent effects of rhBMP-2 (i.e., fusion rate) and morbidity across various spinal arthrodesis procedures. This meta-analysis revealed considerable variability in the total rhBMP-2 dose used across studies and spinal arthrodesis procedures. This variability was likely influenced by differences in the fusion cage sizes employed in various surgical approaches. For ALIF, the use of rhBMP-2 significantly increased fusion rates (from 79.1% to 96.9%), and complication rates showed a positive correlation with rhBMP-2 dose (Pearson correlation coefficient 0.98, p<0.05). For PLF, the use of rhBMP-2 at doses ≥8.5 mg per level significantly increased fusion rates (from 75.3% to 95.2%), while BMP did not affect complication rates. In PLIF/TLIF procedures, the use of BMP resulted in a slightly higher fusion rate compared to the control group, but the difference was not statistically significant (95% vs. 93%). The dose of rhBMP-2 applied to the disc space varied between studies, ranging from 1.4 mg to 12.0 mg, with an average of 4 mg per level. The fusion rate in the lowest dose group (≤4 mg/level) was slightly higher than in the highest dose group (8.5-12.0 mg/level; 95.5% and 94.3%, respectively), but the difference was not statistically significant. The complication rate, which focused on the most commonly reported issues—including radiculopathy, heterotopic bone formation, wound infections and seromas—was 7.1%. This rate was slightly higher in the groups receiving rhBMP-2 compared to the control group. Furthermore, subgroup analyses indicated that the complication rates did not show a positive correlation with the rhBMP-2 dose used [26]. A logistic regression analysis conducted by Lytle et al. [41] investigating the rhBMP-2 MED in 690 patients who underwent TLIF between 2009 and 2014 identified an average dose of 1.28 mg rhBMP-2 per level as optimal, with the subsequent overall fusion rate of 95.2%. The rhBMP-2 per level was a significant predictor for fusion (2.35 odds ratio). The odds of achieving fusion significantly increased by 2.01 when the rhBMP-2 dose range increased from 0.16-1 mg/level to 1.01-2 mg/level. However, no significant increase in fusion odds was observed when the dose further increased from 1.01-2 mg/level to >2 mg/level. In addition, there was a logarithmic dose-dependent relationship between the fusion rate and BMP dose per level, with the fusion rate plateauing when the dose increased to ≥2 mg per level [41]. The same authors extended their investigation with a systematic review and meta-analysis, expanded to 2729 patients, exclusively with PLIF/TLIF. They reported that the average dose of rhBMP-2 used was 1.28-12 mg per level, with the lowest MED for fusion being 1.28 mg per level. Complication rates did not differ significantly between the various rhBMP-2 doses, and the rhBMP-2 placement site did not significantly affect fusion or complication rates [40].
However, given the heterogeneity of patient populations within the dose range groups and the lack of comprehensive data on the lower dose groups, this analysis required further investigation.

Verdict for low-dose rhBMP-2 : should it be prioritized for clinical safety or criticized for inadequate effectiveness?

The recent global demographic shift toward an aging population has underscored the significance of rhBMP-2 as a potent osteoinductive agent. rhBMP-2 has demonstrated comparable fusion rates to autologous bone grafts, even in physically compromised individuals with multiple comorbidities. Despite its superior osteoinductive properties, the clinical application of rhBMP-2 has faced challenges due to the occurrence of unexpected adverse reactions not encountered with endogenous BMP-2 during bone healing. And despite efforts by surgeons to mitigate risks by adjusting the rhBMP-2 dose downward from the higher doses used in the early years of clinical adoption, the potential for adverse reactions remains a concern. Recent commercial preparations of rhBMP-2 delivered on ACS or osteoconductive carriers provide a standard dose of 1.05 mg, which can be segmented and distributed over multiple fusion segments. Although there is widespread availability of smallerdose rhBMP-2 preparations, there remains a need for further research to investigate the effect of these lower doses at each fusion level. Furthermore, there still lacks definitive data regarding the MED of rhBMP-2 that will achieve optimal fusion rates while minimizing associated complications.
Recent, ongoing research has demonstrated the efficacy of low-dose rhBMP-2 in promoting bone healing while minimizing complications. In the case of additional one-side PLF performed with interbody fusion, applying 1 mg rhBMP-2 per segment combined with HA granules resulted in fusion rates and patient-reported outcomes comparable to those achieved with ICBG. Notably, no device-related adverse events were observed for up to 1 year of follow-up [56]. In PLIF procedures, 0.5 mg rhBMP-2 was used for single-level fusion and 1 mg for 2-3 level fusions with a composite carrier (HA, β-TCP and poloxamer hydrogel). Average doses of 0.3-0.5 mg per segment promoted effective bone fusion in PLIF. Screw loosening was more common in the control group, but no significant differences were seen for other complications [47]. In TLIF for 1-2 level fusion, 0.5-1 mg rhBMP-2 was used intra-cage with the same composite carrier, demonstrating the safety and efficacy of E. coli-derived rhBMP-2 with minimal postoperative complications [37]. A recent retrospective study by Ryu et al. [50] examined the use of low-dose rhBMP-2 (0.5 mg/level) combined with HA granules in TLIF procedures for osteoporotic patients. Fusion outcomes were comparable between patients receiving rhBMP-2 alone and those additionally treated with denosumab, while the latter group showed a significantly lower incidence of osteolysis (p=0.013). These findings reinforce the feasibility of low-dose rhBMP-2 use in high-risk populations with adjunctive therapies [50]. In a pilot study aimed at preventing proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) and proximal junctional failure (PJF) after spinal deformity correction, 0.5 mg rhBMP-2 was injected into the uppermost instrumented vertebra with a β-TCP poloxamer hydrogel carrier. This technique improved cancellous bone formation around the pedicle screws, resulting in fewer incidents of PJK and PJF, greater resistance to compression fractures and enhanced screw pull-out strength. Patient-reported outcomes were excellent during the first 6 months after surgery, with no revision cases among patients in the study group [38]. A clinical trial is underway to compare the safety and effectiveness of 0.5-1.0 mg rhBMP-2 per level (maximum dose of 2 mg per patient) with HA granules against the use of autogenous bone in TLIF for 1-2 level fusions. This trial is registered with the Korea Clinical Research Information Service (https://cris.nih.go.kr; identifier number : KCT0005610) [13]. These studies highlight the potential of low-dose formulations to achieve significant therapeutic outcomes, suggesting an optimized balance between efficacy and safety in clinical applications.

SUGGESTED CONCLUSIONS

Several previous studies have suggested that numerous factors may have contributed to the recent decline in rhBMP-2 dose, including efforts to reduce costs, increased surgeon experience leading to improved fusion rates with lower doses and growing concerns about potential complications. Beyond financial considerations, future developments modifying rh- BMP-2 products so that they can more effectively modulate their primary expression, subsequent endogenous release and bioavailability may significantly reduce persistent adverse reactions by better mimicking the natural physiology of human bone healing. This could be crucial for enhancing our understanding of the feasibly altered biological behaviours of rhBMP-2 within other osteoinductive carriers, predicting possible dose-dependent responses, preparing countermeasures against adverse reactions and deterring liberal off-label use of this valuable substance.

Notes

Conflicts of interest

Seung-Jae Hyun has been editorial board of JKNS since January 2023. He was not involved in the review process of this review article. Ji Hyun Youn and Hyun Jung Park are employees of CG Bio Co., Ltd., part of the academic/research team, and independently participated in the literature search, analysis, and drafting of this article. The employment relationship did not influence the content of this paper. Apart from their regular salaries, the authors have no financial or non-financial conflicts of interest related to this article.

Informed consent

This type of study does not require informed consent.

Author contributions

Conceptualization : JHL; Data curation : JHY; Formal analysis : JHY; Funding acquisition : SJH; Methodology : HJP; Project administration : JHL; Visualization : HJP; Writing - original draft : JHY; Writing - review & editing : JHL

Data sharing

None

Preprint

None

Fig. 1.
Rapid systemic clearance of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rhBMP-2).
jkns-2025-0025f1.jpg
Fig. 2.
Gross and structural images of representative carriers for the rhBMP-2 delivery matrix. Gross images of an absorbable collagen sponge (A), hydroxyapatite granules (B), and a composite carrier composed of hydroxyapatite, β-TCP, and poloxamer 407 (C). Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images of an absorbable collagen sponge (D) and a hydroxyapatite granule (E) at low magnification (100×). A micro-computed tomography image of a composite carrier (F) composed of hydroxyapatite, β-TCP and poloxamer 407. (A and D) and (B and E) exhibit structural characteristics that allow them to deliver rhBMP-2 solution, while (C and F) show the final structure in which rhBMP-2 is already incorporated. rhBMP-2 : recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2, β-TCP : beta-tricalcium phosphate.
jkns-2025-0025f2.jpg
Table 1.
Differences in characteristics between ACS and ceramic or ceramic composite carriers
Characteristic ACS Ceramic or ceramic composites
Biocompatibility [1,19,20,29] High High
Osteoinductivity [1,25,45,49] Low Moderate
Osteoconductivity [1,20] Moderate High
Mechanical strength [1,20] Weak (less effective for space maintenance) Strong (effective for space maintenance)
Degradation rate or carrier [35] Faster Slower
rhBMP-2 incorporation mechanism [1,7,59,69] Absorption Adsorption
rhBMP-2 release mechanism [16,28,35,39] - Rapid release due to weak collagen interaction (low binding affinity) - Sustained release via strong surface adsorption (electrostatic and hydrogen bonding)
- Additional diffusion-based release of unbound rhBMP-2 from porous matrix - Supplementary diffusion of non-adsorbed rhBMP-2 from porous structure
rhBMP-2 release pattern [17,19,27,28,35] Rapid initial burst release followed by sustained release Controlled and sustained release with minimal initial burst
In vitro release kinetics [57]* 78.4% release of initial load (~ up to 24 days) 22.5% release of initial load (~ up to 24 days)
Released most of the rhBMP-2 on day 1 Released significantly more on days 7-14 and days 14-24
Released significantly more on days 1-7 ※Ceramic composite carrier
Biological half-life [57] 3.8 hours 6.2 hours
※Ceramic composite carrier
Newly formed bone in the fusion mass [57] A lower percentage of new bone area Higher percentage of new bone area
Lower bone BMD of the new bone Higher BMD of the new bone area

* In vitro release kinetics quantified by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

In vitro release kinetics of fluorescently labeled rhBMP-2 with an amine-reactive nearinfrared fluorochrome (mice, subcutaneous implantation).

In vitro posterolateral spinal fusion model (rat).

ACS : absorbable collagen sponge, rhBMP-2 : recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2, BMD : bone mineral density

References

1. Agrawal V, Sinha M : A review on carrier systems for bone morphogenetic protein-2. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 105 : 904-925, 2017
crossref pmid pdf
2. Bae HW, Patel VV, Sardar ZM, Badura JM, Pradhan BB, Seim HB 3rd, et al : Transient local bone remodeling effects of rhBMP-2 in an ovine interbody spine fusion model. J Bone Joint Surg Am 98 : 2061-2070, 2016
crossref pmid
3. Bagaria V : Bone morphogenic protein: current state of field and the road ahead. J Orthop 2 : e3, 2005

4. Beschloss AM, DiCindio CM, Lombardi JS, Shillingford JN, Laratta JL, Holderread B, et al : The rise and fall of bone morphogenetic protein 2 throughout the United States. Clin Spine Surg 35 : 264-269, 2022
crossref pmid
5. Boden SD, Kang J, Sandhu H, Heller JG : Use of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 to achieve posterolateral lumbar spine fusion in humans: a prospective, randomized clinical pilot trial: 2002 Volvo Award in clinical studies. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 27 : 2662-2673, 2002
pmid
6. Boerckel JD, Kolambkar YM, Dupont KM, Uhrig BA, Phelps EA, Stevens HY, et al : Effects of protein dose and delivery system on BMP-mediated bone regeneration. Biomaterials 32 : 5241-5251, 2011
crossref pmid pmc
7. Boix T, Gómez-Morales J, Torrent-Burgués J, Monfort A, Puigdomènech P, Rodríguez-Clemente R : Adsorption of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein rhBMP-2m onto hydroxyapatite. J Inorg Biochem 99 : 1043-1050, 2005
crossref pmid
8. Burkus JK, Gornet MF, Dickman CA, Zdeblick TA : Anterior lumbar interbody fusion using rhBMP-2 with tapered interbody cages. J Spinal Disord Tech 15 : 337-349, 2002
crossref pmid
9. Burkus JK, Transfeldt EE, Kitchel SH, Watkins RG, Balderston RA : Clinical and radiographic outcomes of anterior lumbar interbody fusion using recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 27 : 2396-408, 2002
crossref pmid
10. Buttermann GR : Prospective nonrandomized comparison of an allograft with bone morphogenic protein versus an iliac-crest autograft in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Spine J 8 : 426-435, 2008
crossref pmid
11. Carlisle E, Fischgrund JS : Bone morphogenetic proteins for spinal fusion. Spine J 5(6 Suppl):240S-249S, 2005
crossref pmid
12. Carragee EJ, Hurwitz EL, Weiner BK : A critical review of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 trials in spinal surgery: emerging safety concerns and lessons learned. Spine J 11 : 471-491, 2011
crossref pmid
13. Choi JY, Park HJ, Park SM, Kang CN, Song KS : Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of Escherichia coli-derived recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion to treat degenerative spinal disease: a protocol of prospective, randomized controlled, assessor-blinded, open-label, multicenter trial. J Orthop Surg Res 17 : 397, 2022
crossref pmid pmc pdf
14. De Stefano FA, Elarjani T, Burks JD, Burks SS, Levi AD : Dose adjustment associated complications of bone morphogenetic protein: a longitudinal assessment. World Neurosurg 156 : e64-e71, 2021
crossref pmid
15. Dimar JR 2nd, Glassman SD, Burkus JK, Pryor PW, Hardacker JW, Carreon LY : Clinical and radiographic analysis of an optimized rhBMP-2 formulation as an autograft replacement in posterolateral lumbar spine arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91 : 1377-1386, 2009
crossref pmid
16. Dong X, Wang Q, Wu T, Pan H : Understanding adsorption-desorption dynamics of BMP-2 on hydroxyapatite (001) surface. Biophys J 93 : 750-759, 2007
crossref pmid pmc
17. El Bialy I, Jiskoot W, Reza Nejadnik M : Formulation, delivery and stability of bone morphogenetic proteins for effective bone regeneration. Pharm Res 34 : 1152-1170, 2017
crossref pmid pmc pdf
18. Food and Drug Administration : InFUSETM Bone Graft/LT-CAGETM Lumbar Tapered Fusion Device. Available at : https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf/p000058b.pdf

19. Friess W : Collagen--biomaterial for drug delivery. Eur J Pharm Biopharm 45 : 113-136, 1998
pmid
20. Friess W, Uludag H, Foskett S, Biron R, Sargeant C : Characterization of absorbable collagen sponges as rhBMP-2 carriers. Int J Pharm 187 : 91-99, 1999
crossref pmid
21. Fu R, Selph S, McDonagh M, Peterson K, Tiwari A, Chou R, et al : Effectiveness and harms of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 in spine fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 158 : 890-902, 2013
crossref pmid pdf
22. Gamradt SC, Lieberman JR : Genetic modification of stem cells to enhance bone repair. Ann Biomed Eng 32 : 136-147, 2004
crossref pmid pdf
23. Glassman SD, Carreon LY, Campbell MJ, Johnson JR, Puno RM, Djurasovic M, et al : The perioperative cost of Infuse bone graft in posterolateral lumbar spine fusion. Spine J 8 : 443-448, 2008
crossref pmid
24. Goulet JA, Senunas LE, DeSilva GL, Greenfield ML : Autogenous iliac crest bone graft. Complications and functional assessment. Clin Orthop Relat Res (339):76-81, 1997
crossref pmid
25. Haidar ZS, Hamdy RC, Tabrizian M : Delivery of recombinant bone morphogenetic proteins for bone regeneration and repair. Part B: delivery systems for BMPs in orthopaedic and craniofacial tissue engineering. Biotechnol Lett 31 : 1825-1835, 2009
crossref pmid pdf
26. Hofstetter CP, Hofer AS, Levi AD : Exploratory meta-analysis on dose-related efficacy and morbidity of bone morphogenetic protein in spinal arthrodesis surgery. J Neurosurg Spine 24 : 457-475, 2016
crossref pmid
27. Hollinger JO, Uludag H, Winn SR : Sustained release emphasizing recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 31 : 303-318, 1998
crossref pmid
28. Huang X, Brazel CS : On the importance and mechanisms of burst release in matrix-controlled drug delivery systems. J Control Release 73 : 121-136, 2001
crossref pmid
29. Hubbell JA : Biomaterials in tissue engineering. Biotechnology (N Y) 13 : 565-576, 1995
crossref pmid pdf
30. Hustedt JW, Blizzard DJ : The controversy surrounding bone morphogenetic proteins in the spine: a review of current research. Yale J Biol Med 87 : 549-561, 2014
pmid pmc
31. James AW, LaChaud G, Shen J, Asatrian G, Nguyen V, Zhang X, et al : A review of the clinical side effects of bone morphogenetic protein-2. Tissue Eng Part B Rev 22 : 284-297, 2016
crossref pmid pmc
32. Kaito T, Myoui A, Takaoka K, Saito N, Nishikawa M, Tamai N, et al : Potentiation of the activity of bone morphogenetic protein-2 in bone regeneration by a PLA-PEG/hydroxyapatite composite. Biomaterials 26 : 73-79, 2005
crossref pmid
33. Kerezoudis P, Alvi MA, Freedman BA, Nassr A, Bydon M : Utilization trends of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein in the United States. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 46 : 874-881, 2021
crossref pmid
34. Kim YH, Ha KY, Rhyu KW, Park HY, Cho CH, Kim HC, et al : Lumbar interbody fusion: techniques, pearls and pitfalls. Asian Spine J 14 : 730-741, 2020
crossref pmid pmc pdf
35. King WJ, Krebsbach PH : Growth factor delivery: how surface interactions modulate release in vitro and in vivo. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 64 : 1239-1256, 2012
crossref pmid pmc
36. Kornblum MB, Fischgrund JS, Herkowitz HN, Abraham DA, Berkower DL, Ditkoff JS : Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis with spinal stenosis: a prospective long-term study comparing fusion and pseudarthrosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 29 : 726-733; discussion 733-734, 2004
pmid
37. Kwon JW, Cho JH, Lee JB, Kim JH : Evaluation of the fusion rate and safety of escherichia coli-derived rhBMP-2 in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for patients with degenerative lumbar disease: a prospective, multicenter, single-arm trial. J Clin Med 13 : 1733, 2024
crossref pmid pmc
38. Kwon O, Choi JY, Park JH, Ham DW, Park SM, Yeom JS, et al : Transpedicular injection of rhBMP-2 with β-tricalcium phosphate to reduce the proximal junctional kyphosis after adult spinal deformity correction: preliminary study. Sci Rep 14 : 6660, 2024
crossref pmid pmc pdf
39. Li RH, Wozney JM : Delivering on the promise of bone morphogenetic proteins. Trends Biotechnol 19 : 255-265, 2001
crossref pmid
40. Lytle EJ, Lawless MH, Paik G, Tong D, Soo TM : The minimally effective dose of bone morphogenetic protein in posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Spine J 20 : 1286-1304, 2020
crossref pmid
41. Lytle EJ, Slavnic D, Tong D, Bahoura M, Govila L, Gonda R, et al : Minimally effective dose of bone morphogenetic protein in minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusions: six hundred ninety patients in a dose-finding longitudinal cohort study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 44 : 989-995, 2019
pmid
42. Martin GJ Jr, Boden SD, Marone MA, Marone MA, Moskovitz PA : Posterolateral intertransverse process spinal arthrodesis with rhBMP-2 in a nonhuman primate: important lessons learned regarding dose, carrier, and safety. J Spinal Disord 12 : 179-186, 1999
pmid
43. McClellan JW, Mulconrey DS, Forbes RJ, Fullmer N : Vertebral bone resorption after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with bone morphogenetic protein (rhBMP-2). J Spinal Disord Tech 19 : 483-486, 2006
crossref pmid
44. Nakagawa S, Okada R, Kushioka J, Kodama J, Tsukazaki H, Bal Z, et al : Effects of rhBMP-2-loaded hydroxyapatite granules/beta-tricalcium phosphate hydrogel (HA/β-TCP/hydrogel) composite on a rat model of caudal intervertebral fusion. Sci Rep 12 : 7906, 2022
crossref pmid pmc pdf
45. Noshi T, Yoshikawa T, Dohi Y, Ikeuchi M, Horiuchi K, Ichijima K, et al : Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 potentiates the in vivo osteogenic ability of marrow/hydroxyapatite composites. Artif Organs 25 : 201-208, 2001
crossref pmid
46. Ong KL, Villarraga ML, Lau E, Carreon LY, Kurtz SM, Glassman SD : Off-label use of bone morphogenetic proteins in the United States using administrative data. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35 : 1794-1800, 2010
crossref pmid
47. Park S, Jeong YH, Ha BJ, Yoo BS, Kim SH, Lee CK, et al : Fusion rate of Escherichia coli-derived recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 compared with local bone autograft in posterior lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar disorders. Spine J 23 : 1877-1885, 2023
crossref pmid
48. Pradhan BB, Bae HW, Dawson EG, Patel VV, Delamarter RB : Graft resorption with the use of bone morphogenetic protein: lessons from anterior lumbar interbody fusion using femoral ring allografts and recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31 : E277-E284, 2006
crossref pmid
49. Rico-Llanos GA, Borrego-González S, Moncayo-Donoso M, Becerra J, Visser R : Collagen type I biomaterials as scaffolds for bone tissue engineering. Polymers (Basel) 13 : 599, 2021
crossref pmid pmc
50. Ryu S, Yoon SJ, Lee CK, Yi S, Kim KN, Ha Y, et al : The combined effects of RhBMP-2 and systemic RANKL inhibitor in patients with bone density loss undergoing posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a retrospective observational analysis with propensity score matching. Neurospine 20 : 1186-1192, 2023
crossref pmid pmc pdf
51. Saito N, Okada T, Horiuchi H, Ota H, Takahashi J, Murakami N, et al : Local bone formation by injection of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 contained in polymer carriers. Bone 32 : 381-386, 2003
crossref pmid
52. Satake K, Kanemura T, Yamaguchi H, Segi N, Ouchida J : Predisposing factors for intraoperative endplate injury of extreme lateral interbody fusion. Asian Spine J 10 : 907-914, 2016
crossref pmid pmc pdf
53. Shields LB, Raque GH, Glassman SD, Campbell M, Vitaz T, Harpring J, et al : Adverse effects associated with high-dose recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 use in anterior cervical spine fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31 : 542-547, 2006
crossref pmid
54. Simmonds MC, Brown JV, Heirs MK, Higgins JP, Mannion RJ, Rodgers MA, et al : Safety and effectiveness of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 for spinal fusion: a meta-analysis of individual-participant data. Ann Intern Med 158 : 877-889, 2013
crossref pmid pdf
55. Singh K, Smucker JD, Gill S, Boden SD : Use of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 as an adjunct in posterolateral lumbar spine fusion: a prospective CT-scan analysis at one and two years. J Spinal Disord Tech 19 : 416-423, 2006
pmid
56. Son HJ, Choi SH, Lee MK, Kang CN : Efficacy and safety of Escherichia coliderived recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 in additional lumbar posterolateral fusion: minimum 1-year follow-up. Spine J 21 : 1340-1346, 2021
crossref pmid
57. Tateiwa D, Nakagawa S, Tsukazaki H, Okada R, Kodama J, Kushioka J, et al : A novel BMP-2-loaded hydroxyapatite/beta-tricalcium phosphate microsphere/hydrogel composite for bone regeneration. Sci Rep 11 : 16924, 2021
crossref pmid pmc pdf
58. Toth JM, Boden SD, Burkus JK, Badura JM, Peckham SM, McKay WF : Shortterm osteoclastic activity induced by locally high concentrations of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 in a cancellous bone environment. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34 : 539-550, 2009
crossref pmid
59. Turhani D, Weissenböck M, Stein E, Wanschitz F, Ewers R : Exogenous recombinant human BMP-2 has little initial effects on human osteoblastic cells cultured on collagen type I coated/noncoated hydroxyapatite ceramic granules. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 65 : 485-493, 2007
crossref pmid
60. Turner JA, Herron L, Deyo RA : Meta-analysis of the results of lumbar spine fusion. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 251 : 120-122, 1993
crossref pmid
61. United States Senate Finance Committee : Staff report on Medtronic’s influence on INFUSE clinical studies. Int J Occup Environ Health 19 : 67-76, 2013
crossref pmid
62. Urist MR : Bone: formation by autoinduction. Science 150 : 893-899, 1965
crossref pmid
63. Urist MR, Strates BS : Bone morphogenetic protein. J Dent Res 50 : 1392-1406, 1971
crossref pmid pdf
64. Von Benecke JP, Tarsitano E, Zimmermann LA, Shakesheff KM, Walsh WR, Bae HW : A narrative review on recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 2: where are we now? Cureus 16 : e67785, 2024
pmid pmc
65. Wadhwa H, Wu JY, Malacon K, Ames CP, Ratliff JK, Zygourakis CC : Trends, payments, and costs associated with BMP use in Medicare beneficiaries undergoing spinal fusion. Spine J 23 : 816-823, 2023
crossref pmid
66. Wang EA, Rosen V, D’Alessandro JS, Bauduy M, Cordes P, Harada T, et al : Recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein induces bone formation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 87 : 2220-2224, 1990
crossref pmid pmc
67. Wozney JM, Rosen V, Celeste AJ, Mitsock LM, Whitters MJ, Kriz RW, et al : Novel regulators of bone formation: molecular clones and activities. Science 242 : 1528-1534, 1988
crossref pmid
68. Zara JN, Siu RK, Zhang X, Shen J, Ngo R, Lee M, et al : High doses of bone morphogenetic protein 2 induce structurally abnormal bone and inflammation in vivo. Tissue Eng Part A 17 : 1389-1399, 2011
crossref pmid pmc
69. Zhou H, Wu T, Dong X, Wang Q, Shen J : Adsorption mechanism of BMP-7 on hydroxyapatite (001) surfaces. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 361 : 91-96, 2007
crossref pmid
TOOLS
PDF Links  PDF Links
PubReader  PubReader
ePub Link  ePub Link
XML Download  XML Download
Full text via DOI  Full text via DOI
Download Citation  Download Citation
  Print
Share:      
METRICS
0
Crossref
0
Scopus
2,583
View
106
Download
Related article
Editorial Office
1F, 18, Heolleung-ro 569-gil, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea
TEL: +82-2-525-7552   FAX: +82-2-525-7554   E-mail: office@jkns.or.kr
About |  Browse Articles |  Current Issue |  For Authors and Reviewers
Copyright © Korean Neurosurgical Society.                 Developed in M2PI
Close layer