ArticleNeurospine2020
Synthetic Cages Associated With Increased Rates of Revision Surgery and Higher Costs Compared to Allograft in ACDF in the Nonelderly Patient.
Article in Neurospine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Construct length rather than interbody spacer material is associated with reoperation after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026Article
- Anterior cervical decompression and fusion at one and two levels: trends and factors associated with structural allograft versus synthetic cages.North American Spine Society journal · 2024Article
- Clinical and radiological outcomes of non-window-type bioactive glass-ceramic cage in single-level ACDF versus PEEK cage filled with autologous bone.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Comparing zero-profile and conventional cage and plate in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion using finite-element modeling.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Clinical Outcomes and Cost Profiles for Cage and Allograft Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Procedures in the Adult Population: A Propensity Score-Matched Study.Asian spine journal · 2023Article
- Endplate-specific fusion rate 1 year after surgery for two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion(ACDF).Acta neurochirurgica · 2022Article
- The Effect of Subsidence on Segmental and Global Lordosis at Long-term Follow-up After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.Neurospine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to compare all-cause reoperation rates and costs in nonelderly patients treated with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with structural allograft versus synthetic cages for degenerative pathology.
methodsWe queried a private claims database to identify adult patients ( ≤ 65 years) who underwent single-level ACDF in a hospital setting using either structural allograft or a synthetic cage (polyetheretherketone, metal, or hybrid device), from 2010 to 2016. The rate of all-cause reoperations at 2 years were compared between the 2 groups. Index hospitalization costs and 90-day complication rates were also compared. Significance was set at p < 0.05.
resultsA total of 26,754 patients were included in the study. 11,514 patients (43%) underwent ACDF with structural allograft and 15,240 (57%) underwent ACDF with a synthetic cage. The patients in the allograft group were younger and more likely to be male. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups with respect to 90-day complications including: wound dehiscence, dysphagia, dysphonia, and hematoma/seroma. In the 2-year postoperative period, the synthetic cage group had a significantly higher rate of allcause reoperation compared to the allograft group (9.1% vs. 8.0%, p = 0.002). Index hospitalization costs were significantly higher in the synthetic cage group compared to those in the allograft group ($23,475 vs. $20,836, p < 0.001).
conclusionStructural allograft is associated with lower all-cause reoperation rates and lower index costs in nonelderly patients undergoing ACDF surgery for degenerative pathology. It is important to understand this data as we transition toward value-based care.
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.