ArticleOrthopedic reviews2020
Follow-up of a new titaniumcoated polyetheretherketone cage for the cervical spine.
Article in Orthopedic reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Equivalent Clinical Outcomes but Divergent Biological Adaptation After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Versus Cervical Disc Arthroplasty: A Longitudinal MRI Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Integral fixation titanium/polyetheretherketone cages for cervical arthrodesis: Two-year clinical outcomes and fusion rates using β-tricalcium phosphate or supercritical carbon dioxide treated allograft.Journal of craniovertebral junction & spineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Poly-ether-ether-ketone (PEEK) cages have lower modulus of elasticity when compared with Titanium (TTN) cages. This suggests that PEEK-cages could show a lower rate of subsidence after anterior cervical discectomy-fusion (ACDF) and might lead to a lower loss of correction. We investigated the one to five year-results of standalone PEEK-TTN-porous coated cages in a patient cohort from 2014 to 2017. The patients underwent single-level ACDF for disc herniation and degenerative discopathy. Clinical and radiological outcome were assessed in 50 eligible patients after a mean of 27 months. Results: Solid arthrodesis was found in 84%. Neck disability index (NDI), and visual analogue scale (VAS) of neck and arm show comparable results to the literature. Conclusions: Clinical and radiological outcomes of ACDF with PEEK-body-cages with a porous coated surface show good bony integration. The modulus of elasticity, design, shape, size, cage surface architecture, as well as bone density, endplate preparation, radical microdiscectomy and distraction during surgery should be considered as important factors influencing the clinical results. One main advantage, over titanium cages, is the absence of MRI artifacts, allowing an excellent postoperative follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.