2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.02.041
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of serum nicotine level on posterior spinal fusion in an in vivo rabbit model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…38 However, in contrast Daffner et al showed in an animal model that a small (5.25 mg) dose of nicotine actually improved fusion rates compared to the control. 43 These findings suggest that effects of nicotine on fusion may be dose-dependent and that the negative of effects of smoking on nonunion may be attributable to other components of cigarette smoke. Lee et al used a rabbit model to show that acute cigarette inhalation may delay but not prevent the spinal fusion process.…”
Section: In Vivo Animal Studies and Lumbar Fusionmentioning
confidence: 93%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…38 However, in contrast Daffner et al showed in an animal model that a small (5.25 mg) dose of nicotine actually improved fusion rates compared to the control. 43 These findings suggest that effects of nicotine on fusion may be dose-dependent and that the negative of effects of smoking on nonunion may be attributable to other components of cigarette smoke. Lee et al used a rabbit model to show that acute cigarette inhalation may delay but not prevent the spinal fusion process.…”
Section: In Vivo Animal Studies and Lumbar Fusionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…They determined that the effects of nicotine on spinal fusion are complex, may be dosedependent, and may not always be detrimental, concluding that the effects of smoking on spinal fusion may be due to other components of cigarette smoke. 63 Another study by Daffner claimed to show that nicotine increased osteoblast activity of induced bone marrow stromal cells in a dose dependent manner. 64 These studies should be scrutinize further because of the long-held consensus about the negative effects of nicotine on both bone health and bone healing, but they potentially open the door to the idea that other components of cigarette smoke may be even more harmful to the fusion healing process than nicotine alone.…”
Section: Is There Anything That Can Be Done To Overcome the Effects Omentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We also measured blood nicotine levels in our previous study: 36.5 to 124.8 ng/ml (mean: 72.1 ng/ml) [25]. This concentration range corresponds to 10 to 70 ng/ml (mean: 33 ng/ml) reported for 330 human smokers who smoked 20.7 cigarettes/day on average [25, 31]. Therefore, this model is comparable to humans who are smoking 20 to 40 cigarettes/day.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…4). Previous work has shown that the effects of nicotine on osteoblasts are nuanced and may be concentration- and time-dependent (Rothem et al, 2009, Daffner et al, 2015, Marinucci et al, 2014). In this work, we utilized a moderate-to-low dose (Rothem et al, 2009) of nicotine (50 μM) and found that its effect on ALP activity, BMSC migration, and matrix mineralization were minor compared to those of dioxin.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nicotine is a potent anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive, and has been shown to have deleterious effects on fibroblasts, red blood cells, and macrophages (Zevin et al, 1998, Jorgensen et al, 1998, Leow and Maibach, 1998), in addition to diminishing blood flow to tissues by promoting vasoconstriction (Leow and Maibach, 1998, Bornmyr and Svensson, 1991). Interestingly, the overall impact of nicotine on bone formation is still uncertain, and may be concentration-dependent; high concentrations of nicotine have been shown to inhibit osteoblast proliferation, whereas low concentrations actually have a proliferative effect (Rothem et al, 2009, Daffner et al, 2015, Gotfredsen et al, 2009, Syversen et al, 1999). Numerous studies have proposed that reactive oxygen species and other pro-inflammatory constituents and metabolites are responsible for dysregulation of bone homeostasis, reduction in bone mineral density, and inhibition of fracture healing (Rothem et al, 2009, Syversen et al, 1999, Holzer et al, 2012).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%