Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31694360›Full record

ArticleNeurospine2020

Biomaterials in Spinal Implants: A Review.

Andrew Warburton, Steven J Girdler, Christopher M Mikhail, Amy Ahn, Samuel K Cho

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurospine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 79 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
79citing papers in PubMed
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

79 citing papers in PubMed, 167 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. [Application of three-dimensional printed porous titanium alloy cage and poly-ether-ether-ketone cage in posterior lumbar interbody fusion].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2022
    Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. A comprehensive review of biomechanical factors influencing pedicle screw fixation strength and the critical role of artificial intelligence.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 · 2026
    Article
  6. A comprehensive review of biomechanical factors influencing pedicle screw fixation strength and the critical role of artificial intelligence.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 · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

19 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Andrew WarburtonMount Sinai Health System, New York, NY, USA.
Steven J GirdlerMount Sinai Health System, New York, NY, USA.
Christopher M MikhailMount Sinai Health System, New York, NY, USA.
Amy AhnMount Sinai Health System, New York, NY, USA.
Samuel K ChoMount Sinai Health System, New York, NY, USA.
Mount Sinai Health System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim to find the perfect biomaterial for spinal implant has been the focus of spinal research since the 1800s. Spinal surgery and the devices used therein have undergone a constant evolution in order to meet the needs of surgeons who have continued to further understand the biomechanical principles of spinal stability and have improved as new technologies and materials are available for production use. The perfect biomaterial would be one that is biologically inert/compatible, has a Young's modulus similar to that of the bone where it is implanted, high tensile strength, stiffness, fatigue strength, and low artifacts on imaging. Today, the materials that have been most commonly used include stainless steel, titanium, cobalt chrome, nitinol (a nickel titanium alloy), tantalum, and polyetheretherketone in rods, screws, cages, and plates. Current advancements such as 3-dimensional printing, the ProDisc-L and ProDisc-C, the ApiFix, and the Mobi-C which all aim to improve range of motion, reduce pain, and improve patient satisfaction. Spine surgeons should remain vigilant regarding the current literature and technological advancements in spinal materials and procedures. The progression of spinal implant materials for cages, rods, screws, and plates with advantages and disadvantages for each material will be discussed.

Indexed as

BiomaterialsCagesRodsScrewsSpineSurgery

Identifiers

PMID31694360
PMCPMC7136103
OpenAlexW2987513336

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.