Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25907826›Full record

SynthesisBMC musculoskeletal disorders2015

The design evolution of interbody cages in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a systematic review.

Elizabeth Chong, Matthew H Pelletier, Ralph J Mobbs, William R Walsh

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04214535 (Anterior Cervical Disectomy And Fusion Using The Tritanium® C Anterior Cervical Cage For One Or Two-Levels), which is not on this map. Cited by 80 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
80citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT04214535 naactive not recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Anterior Cervical Disectomy And Fusion Using The Tritanium® C Anterior Cervical Cage For One Or Two-Levels: A Clinical And Radiographic Analysis Pilot Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorCorewell Health EastRan2021 to 2027Enrolled50ConditionsCervical Disc Herniation, Cervical Disc Degeneration, Degenerative Disc DiseaseArmsTritanium C Anterior Cervical Cage
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

80 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 160 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Titanium (Ti) cages may be superior to polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages in lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and radiological outcomes of spinal interbody fusions using Ti versus PEEK cages.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. 3D-printed spine surgery implants: a systematic review of the efficacy and clinical safety profile of patient-specific and off-the-shelf devices.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Zero-profile anchored cage reduces risk of postoperative dysphagia compared with cage with plate fixation after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2017
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Endplate preparation for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: does the amount of endplate removed affect cage subsidence risk?European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

20 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elizabeth ChongUniversity of New South Wales, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia. echong42@gmail.com.
Matthew H PelletierSurgical and Orthopaedic Research Laboratory, Prince of Wales Clinical School, UNSW NSW, Randwick, 2031, Australia. m.pelletier@unsw.edu.au.
Ralph J MobbsUniversity of New South Wales, Randwick, NSW, 2031, Australia. ralphmobbs@hotmail.com.
William R WalshSurgical and Orthopaedic Research Laboratory, Prince of Wales Clinical School, UNSW NSW, Randwick, 2031, Australia. w.walsh@unsw.edu.au.
Sydney Orthopaedic Research Institute · AUUNSW Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnterior cervical discectomy with fusion is a common surgical procedure for patients experiencing pain and/or neurological deficits due to cervical spondylosis. Although iliac crest bone graft remains the gold standard today, the associated morbidity has inspired the search for alternatives, including allograft, synthetic and factor/cell-based grafts; and has further led to a focus on cage fusion technology. Compared to their graft counterparts, cage interbody implants have enhanced biomechanical properties, with designs constantly improving to maximise biocompatibility and osseointegration. We present a systematic review examining the historical progress of implant designs and performance, as well as an update on the currently available designs, and the potential future of cervical interbody implants.

methodsWe performed a systematic review using the keywords "cervical fusion implant design", with no limits on year of publication. Databases used were PubMed, Medline, Embase and Cochrane. In addition, the search was extended to the reference lists of selected articles.

results180 articles were reviewed and 64 articles were eligible for inclusion. Exclusion criteria were based around study design, implant information and patient cohorts. The evolution of cage implant design has been shaped by improved understanding of ideal anatomy, progress in materials research and continuing experimentation of structural design. Originally, designs varied primarily in their choice of structure, however long-term studies have displayed the overall advantages of non-threaded, wedge shaped cages in complementing healthy anatomical profiles, and thus focus has shifted to refining material utilisation and streamlining anterior fixation.

conclusionsEvolution of design has been dramatic over the past decades; however an ideal cage design has yet to be realised. Current research is focusing on the promotion of osseointegration through bioactiviation of surface materials, as well as streamlining anterior fixation with the introduction of integrated screws and zero profile designs. Future designs will benefit from a combination of these advances in order to achieve ideal disc heights, cervical alignments and fusions.

Indexed as

Prosthesis DesignBiomechanical PhenomenaCervical VertebraeDiskectomyHumansIntervertebral DiscOsseointegrationPostoperative ComplicationsRecovery of FunctionRisk FactorsSpinal FusionSpondylosisTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID25907826
PMCPMC4416390
OpenAlexW1967709558

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.