Effect of Teriparatide Versus Zoledronate on Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Postmenopausal Women with Osteoporosis.

Objective: We evaluated the efficacy of teriparatide versus zoledronate on spinal fusion in osteoporotic patients after posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF).

Methods: Postmenopausal women with osteoporosis undergoing PLIF for degenerative spondylolisthesis were randomly assigned to receive either zoledronate or teriparatide. During the 2-year follow-up period, serial radiographs were used to determine fusion status and instrumentation-related sequelae (a composite of adjacent vertebral compressive fracture, instrumentation failure, and fusion failure). The bone mineral density (BMD) and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were also serially measured.

Results: Of the 77 patients, 36 were in the teriparatide group and 41 in the zoledronate group and had completed the 2-year follow-up assessments. Bony union had been achieved more frequently in the teriparatide group than in the zoledronate group at 6 months postoperatively (P < 0.05), although the overall rate of bone union was comparable between the 2 groups. The incidence of instrumentation-related sequelae was also comparable between the 2 groups (teriparatide vs. zoledronate group, 13.9% vs. 22.0%). Regarding antiosteoporosis, the BMD values had significantly improved in both groups at the last follow-up. The teriparatide group had attained more BMD increments at 12 months postoperatively than had the zoledronate group. Furthermore, the ODI had consistently decreased in both groups with a lower ODI in the teriparatide group than in the zoledronate group at 12 months postoperatively.

Conclusions: Among postmenopausal women with osteoporosis, teriparatide showed superior bone union at 6 months and greater BMD improvement at 12 months after PLIF compared with zoledronate administration, although both resulted in similar overall effects on spinal fusion.