CERAMENT treatment of fracture defects (CERTiFy): protocol for a prospective, multicenter, randomized study investigating the use of CERAMENT™ BONE VOID FILLER in tibial plateau fractures.

BACKGROUND: Bone graft substitutes are widely used for reconstruction of posttraumatic bone defects. However, their clinical significance in comparison to autologous bone grafting, the gold-standard in reconstruction of larger bone defects, still remains under debate. This prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study investigates the differences in pain, quality of life, and cost of care in the treatment of tibia plateau fractures-associated bone defects using either autologous bone grafting or bioresorbable hydroxyapatite/calcium sulphate cement (CERAMENT™|BONE VOID FILLER (CBVF)). METHODS/DESIGN: CERTiFy (CERament™ Treatment of Fracture defects) is a prospective, multicenter, controlled, randomized trial. We plan to enroll 136 patients with fresh traumatic depression fractures of the proximal tibia (types AO 41-B2 and AO 41-B3) in 13 participating centers in Germany. Patients will be randomized to receive either autologous iliac crest bone graft or CBVF after reduction and osteosynthesis of the fracture to reconstruct the subchondral bone defect and prevent the subsidence of the articular surface. The primary outcome is the SF-12 Physical Component Summary at week 26. The co-primary endpoint is the pain level 26 weeks after surgery measured by a visual analog scale. The SF-12 Mental Component Summary after 26 weeks and costs of care will serve as key secondary endpoints. The study is designed to show non-inferiority of the CBVF treatment to the autologous iliac crest bone graft with respect to the physical component of quality of life. The pain level at 26 weeks after surgery is expected to be lower in the CERAMENT bone void filler treatment group. DISCUSSION: CERTiFy is the first randomized multicenter clinical trial designed to compare quality of life, pain, and cost of care in the use of the CBVF and the autologous iliac crest bone graft in the treatment of tibia plateau fractures. The results are expected to influence future treatment recommendations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01828905.

Cost effectiveness of tibial nonunion treatment: A comparison between rhBMP-7 and autologous bone graft in two Italian centres.

Current evidences show that recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein 7 (rhBMP-7, eptotermin alfa) can be considered an effective alternative to autologous bone graft (ABG) in the treatment of tibial nonunions. Few studies, so far, have analysed the costs of treating tibial nonunions with either rhBMP-7 or ABG and none of them has specifically considered the Italian situation. The aim of the present study was to capture, through observational retrospective methods, the direct medical costs associated with the treatment of tibial nonunions with rhBMP-7 or ABG in Italy and to compare the cost effectiveness of the two interventions. The secondary objective was to perform a cost-reimbursement analysis for hospitalisations associated with the two treatments. Data of 54 patients with indication for tibial nonunion were collected from existing data sources. Of these patients, 26 were treated with ABG and 28 with rhBMP-7. The study captured the direct medical costs for treating each tibial nonunion, considering both inpatient and outpatient care. The hospital reimbursement was calculated from discharge registries, based on diagnosis-related group (DRG) values. A subgroup of patients (n=30) was also interviewed to capture perceived health during the follow-up, and the quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were subsequently computed. The two groups were similar for what concerns baseline characteristics. While the medical costs incurred during the hospitalisation associated with treatment were on average €3091.21 higher (P<0.001) in patients treated with rhBMP-7 (reflecting the product procurement costs), the costs incurred during the follow-up were on average €2344.45 higher (P=0.02) in patients treated with ABG. Considering all costs incurred from the treatment, there was a borderline statistical evidence (P=0.04) for a mean increase of €795.42, in the rhBMP-7 group. Furthermore, the study demonstrated that, without appropriate reimbursement, the hospital undergoes significant losses (P=0.003) when using rhBMP-7 instead of ABG. In contrast to these losses, in Italy, the average cost to achieve a successful outcome was €488.96 lower in patients treated with rhBMP-7 and, additionally, the cost per QALY gained was below the cost-utility threshold of $50,000.