ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2021
Evaluation of cage subsidence in standalone lateral lumbar interbody fusion: novel 3D-printed titanium versus polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage.
Article in 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. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
31 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 54 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical and radiological outcomes of titanium cage versus polyetheretherketone cage in lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2025Pooled it
- 3D-printed porous titanium versus polyetheretherketone cages in lateral lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis of subsidence.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- Comparison between Three-Dimensional Printed Titanium and PEEK Cages for Cervical and Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Prospective Controlled Trial.Orthopaedic surgery · 2023Trial
- [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 · 2022Trial
- Comparison between large interbody cage versus two smaller interbody cages in unilateral biportal endoscopic transforaminal interbody 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 · 2026Article
- Outcomes comparison between novel hydroxyapatite enhanced polyetheretherketone and titanium implants after anterior lumbar interbody fusion.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- 3D-printed porous titanium versus PEEK interbody cages in lumbar fusion: biomechanical rationale, clinical evidence, and emerging indications.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Evolution of Titanium Interbody Cages and Current Uses of 3D Printed Titanium in Spine Fusion Surgery.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2025Review
- Use of Double Cages for Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Comparison of 3-Dimensional-Printed Titanium and Polyetheretherketone Cages.International journal of spine surgery · 2025Article
- Applications of 3D printing in orthopedics: a scoping review.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Article
- Evaluating the Efficacy of a Novel Titanium Cage System in ALIF and LLIF: A Retrospective Clinical and Radiographic Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Transforming spinal surgery with innovations in biologics and additive manufacturing.Materials today. Bio · 2025Review
- Innovative 3D-printed porous tantalum cage with non-window design to accelerate spinal fusion: A proof-of-concept study.Materials today. Bio · 2025Article
- Radiographic and Clinical Comparison of Polyetheretherketone Versus 3D-Printed Titanium Cages in Lumbar Interbody Fusion-A Single Institution's Experience.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Biomimetic Porous Ti6Al4V Implants: A Novel Interbody Fusion Cage via Gel-Casting Technique to Promote Spine Fusion.Advanced healthcare materials · 2024Article
- Subsidence Rates Associated With Porous 3D-Printed Versus Solid Titanium Cages in Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.Global spine journal · 2024Article
- Advancements in Custom 3D-Printed Titanium Interbody Spinal Fusion Cages and Their Relevance in Personalized Spine Care.Journal of personalized medicine · 2024Article
- Innovative Developments in Lumbar Interbody Cage Materials and Design: A Comprehensive Narrative Review.Asian spine journal · 2024Article
- Comparison of Long-term Follow-Up of n-HA PA66 Cage and PEEK Cage of Lumbar Interbody Fusion in Multi-level Degenerative Lumbar Diseases: A Stepwise Propensity Score Matching Analysis.Orthopaedic surgery · 2024Article
- Fundamentals of Mechanobiology and Potential Applications in Spinal Fusion.International journal of spine surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aims to compare the early subsidence rate (6-12 months) of standalone novel 3D-printed titanium (Ti) versus polyetheretherketone (PEEK) interbody cages after lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF).
methodA retrospective study of 113 patients (186 levels) who underwent LLIF surgery with Ti or PEEK cages was conducted. Early subsidence was measured in each treated level using the Marchi et al. classification in radiographs or CT scans acquired at 6-12 months follow-up. Multivariate logistic regression analyses with generalized mixed models, setting subsidence as the outcome variable and including cage type (Ti vs PEEK) as well as significant and trending variables (p < 0.10) in univariate analyses, were conducted.
resultsIn total, 51 female and 62 male patients were analyzed. The median [IQR] age at surgery was 60.0 [51.0-70.0] years. Of the 186 levels, 119 levels were treated using PEEK and 67 levels with Ti cages. The overall subsidence rate for Grades I-III was significantly less in the Ti versus the PEEK group (p = 0.003). For high-grade subsidence (Grade II or III), Ti cages also demonstrated a subsidence rate (3.0%) that was significantly less compared to PEEK cages (18.5%) (p = 0.002). Multivariate analysis showed that patients treated with Ti cages were less likely to develop severe subsidence compared to those treated with PEEK (OR = 0.05, 95% CI = 0.01, 0.30) (p = 0.001).
conclusionOur study demonstrated that 3D-printed novel Ti cages had a significantly lower early subsidence rate compared to PEEK cages in standalone LLIF patients.
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.