Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33900982›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2021

Do PEEK Rods for Posterior Instrumented Fusion in the Lumbar Spine Reduce the Risk of Adjacent Segment Disease?

Daniel Hirt, Heather A Prentice, Jessica E Harris, Elizabeth W Paxton, Jessa Alexander, Daniel T Nagasawa, Deven Khosla, Steven M Kurtz

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Daniel HirtDepartment of Neurosurgery, Southern California Permanente Medical Group, Los Angeles, California.
Heather A PrenticeSurgical Outcomes and Analysis, Kaiser Permanente, San Diego, California.
Jessica E HarrisSurgical Outcomes and Analysis, Kaiser Permanente, San Diego, California.
Elizabeth W PaxtonSurgical Outcomes and Analysis, Kaiser Permanente, San Diego, California.
Jessa AlexanderDepartment of Neurology, University of California, San Francisco, California.
Daniel T NagasawaAchieve Brain and Spine Surgery, Santa Monica, California.
Deven KhoslaAchieve Brain and Spine Surgery, Santa Monica, California.
Steven M KurtzExponent, Inc, and Drexel University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Kaiser Permanente · USExponent (United States) · USLos Angeles Medical Center · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPolyetheretherketone (PEEK) rods were clinically introduced in the mid-2000s as an alternative to titanium (Ti) rods for posterior instrumented lumbar spine fusion, theorized to reduce the risk of adjacent segment disease (ASD). However, few studies have follow-up beyond 2 years. Consequently, we conducted a matched cohort study using data from Kaiser Permanente's spine registry to compare the 2 rod systems and risk for outcomes.

methodsPatients aged ≥18 undergoing first posterior lumbar fusion for a degenerative diagnosis from 2009 to 2018 using either a PEEK or a Ti rod were identified. Fusions using Ti rods were 2:1 propensity score matched to PEEK rods on the following factors: patient age, body mass index, smoking, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, diagnosis, interbody use, bone morphogenic protein use, number of levels fused, fusion levels, and operative year. The matched sample included 154 PEEK and 308 Ti fusions. We used Cox regression to evaluate ASD and nonunion, and logistic regression to evaluate 90-day emergency department (ED) visit, readmission, and complication.

resultsWe did not observe a difference in risk for ASD (hazard ratio = 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.66-1.59) or ED visit (odds ratio [OR] = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.48-1.59). A lower likelihood of readmission (OR = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.13-0.94) was observed following PEEK fusion compared with Ti. No nonunions or 90-day complications were observed for the PEEK group; 5 (2-year cumulative incidence = 0.7%) nonunions and 4 (1.3%) complications were observed for the Ti group.

conclusionsOur multicenter study did not support the hypothesis that PEEK rods are associated with a lower ASD risk. Reasons for readmission need to be identified to better understand the differences observed here. Further study of patients with TLIF using Ti and PEEK rods and posterolateral fusion with Ti and PEEK rods is needed. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The present study adds to the literature supporting their midterm effectiveness of PEEK rods compared with Ti rods for both their safety and their effectiveness at the 5-7-year follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Indexed as

adjacent segment diseasefusionlumbar spinepolyetheretherketone rodreadmissiontitanium rod

Identifiers

PMID33900982
PMCPMC8059379
OpenAlexW3154325915

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.