Bone graft options for spinal fusion, compared honestly
Four ways to fill the gap, what each costs you, and where ACTIFUSE, the graft we supply, wins and where it only ties.
The four options in one look
What surgeons weigh before choosing Infuse
In 2011, The Spine Journal re-examined the original industry trials and found the real adverse-event rate was 10 to 50 times what was first reported: unwanted bone growth, swelling, nerve problems, and in anterior lumbar cases in men, retrograde ejaculation. In 2008 the FDA warned about airway swelling in off-label neck use.
To be fair: that controversy is fifteen years old, BMP-2 is still widely used, and large series show complication rates under 1%. It is not a bad product. It is a tradeoff that deserves a conversation, especially when roughly 85% of its use is outside the FDA-approved indication.
Why ACTIFUSE: same destination, fewer things that can go wrong
It fused 93% of 694 patients in an independent review, statistically the same as BMP-2, with less reported back pain in the randomized trial. It is used on-label, costs a fraction of a biologic, and takes nothing from your hip.
It is not proven better than the cheaper synthetics; no head-to-head human trial exists, and we say so. What it has that they do not: fifteen-plus years in regional operating rooms, surgeons who reorder it, and the largest independent evidence base in its class.
Four questions that settle it for your case
- Which of these four are you planning for me, and why?
- If BMP-2: is my procedure on-label or off-label?
- If my own bone: what happens if we skip the harvest?
- Have you used ACTIFUSE, and would it fit my case?
Your surgeon picks the graft. Make sure the evidence is on the table.
Elite Surgical Technologies supplies ACTIFUSE across Ohio, Michigan, Indiana and the Pittsburgh area, and delivers the clinical data to your surgeon same day.
