Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 247

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Osteoinductivity of Commercially Available Demineralized Bone Matrix: Preparations in a Spine Fusion Model

Peterson, Brett, Whang, Peter G., Iglesias, Roberto, Wang, Jeff C., Lieberman, Jay R.·2004·The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although autogenous bone is the most widely used graft material for spinal fusion, demineralized bone matrix preparations are available as alternatives or supplements to autograft. They are prepared by acid extraction of most of the mineralized component, with retention of the collagen and noncollagenous proteins, including growth factors. Differences in allograft processing methods among suppliers might yield products with different osteoinductive activities. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of three different commercially available demineralized bone matrix products for inducing spinal fusion in an athymic rat model. METHODS: Sixty male athymic rats underwent spinal fusion and were divided into three groups of eighteen animals each. Group I received Grafton Putty; Group II, DBX Putty; and Group III, AlloMatrix Injectable Putty. A control group of six animals (Group IV) underwent decortication alone. Six animals from each of the three experimental groups were killed at each of three intervals (two, four, and eight weeks), and the six animals from the control group were killed at eight weeks. At each of the time-points, radiographic and histologic analysis and manual testing of the explanted spines were performed. RESULTS: The spines in Group I demonstrated higher rates of radiographically evident fusion at eight weeks than did the spines in Group III or Group IV (p < 0.05). Manual testing of the spines at four weeks revealed variable fusion rates (five of six in Group I, two of six in Group II, and none of six in Group III). At eight weeks, all six spines in Group I, three of the six in Group II, and no spine in Group III or IV had fused. Histologic analysis of the spines in Groups I, II, and III demonstrated varying amounts of residual demineralized bone matrix and new bone formation. Group-I spines demonstrated the most new bone formation. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated differences in the osteoinductive potentials of commercially available demineralized bone matrices in this animal model.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2106/00004623-200410000-00016

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 247

Metadata

Authors
Peterson, B., Whang, P. G., Iglesias, R., Wang, J. C., & Lieberman, J. R.
Venue
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery
Published
2004-10
Volume
86
Issue
10
Pages
2243-2250
ISSN
0021-9355 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1631732630
Cited by
247
References
0
FWCI
9.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Osteoinductivity of Commercially Available Demineralized Bone Matrix: Preparations in a Spine Fusion Model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2106/00004623-200410000-00016
The paper
Peterson, B., Whang, P. G., Iglesias, R., Wang, J. C., & Lieberman, J. R. (2004). Osteoinductivity of Commercially Available Demineralized Bone Matrix: Preparations in a Spine Fusion Model. The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200410000-00016

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.