Table 2.

Summary of clinical literatures on allograft for spinal fusion

Ref.	Description of study
Cervical spine
Brown et al. [17]	A roentgenographic evaluation of frozen allografts versus autografts in anterior cervical spine fusions
Young et al. [109]	A retrospective comparison of cadaveric fibular allografts and autologous iliac crest grafts for cervical anterior spinal fusion
Savolainen et al. [77]	A retrospective comparison of iliac crest versus artificial bone grafts in cervical fusions
Zhang et al. [112]	A retrospective analysis of cervical spondylotic myelopathy cases treated by anterior fusion
Zdeblick et al. [111]	A retrospective analysis of freeze-dried allograft bone for anterior cervical fusions
Bishop et al. [8]	A prospective study of anterior cervical fusion in order to compare allografts and autografts
Lumbar spine
Jorgenson et al. [48]	A prospective analysis of autograft versus allograft in posterolateral lumbar fusion in the same patient
An et al. [3]	A prospective comparison of autograft versus allograft for adult posterolateral lumbar spine fusion
Scoliosis
Aurori et al. [5]	A retrospective comparison of the incidence of pseudoarthrosis in fusions for scoliosis supplemented with autografts and frozen allografts
Dodd et al. [29]	A case-control study of the use of autograft versus allograft bone in the surgery of idiopathic adolescent scoliosis with instrumentation

Ref.	Evidence level	Conclusion
Cervical spine
Brown et al. [17]	III	No significant difference was noted in the fusion rates
Young et al. [109]	III	The use of fibular allografts for anterior cervical fusion can be performed with acceptable rates of fusion as compared to the use of autologous iliac crest grafts
Savolainen et al. [77]	III	There was no significant difference in the fusion rate; moreover, donor site complications were not observed in patients with allografts
Zhang et al. [112]	IV	Autografts yielded higher fusion rates and better overall results than did allografts
Zdeblick et al. [111]	III	For two-level procedures, the nonunion rate with allografts was higher than that with autografts and graft collapse was more commonly observed with allografts
Bishop et al. [8]	II	Autografts were found to be superior to allografts after both single- and multiple-level anterior cervical fusion procedures
Lumbar spine
Jorgenson et al. [48]	II	Ethylene oxide-treated allograft is inferior to autograft and should not be used for posterior lumbar fusions
An et al. [3]	II	Bone densitometry results also showed that autograft sites gave significantly greater bone density, followed by mixture, frozen allografts, and freeze-dried allografts
Scoliosis
Aurori et al. [5]	III	The incidence of pseudarthrosis was not significantly different
Dodd et al. [29]	III	There was no difference in a radiographic assessment of bone graft mass nor in the maintenance of the curve correction