ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2022
Evolution of Bioactive Implants in Lateral Interbody Fusion.
Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Experimental quantification of resistance to subsidence conferred by endplate-specific expandable implants in anterior lumbar interbody fusion.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- Advancements in biomaterials and bioactive solutions for lumbar spine fusion cages: Current trends and future perspectives.Bioactive materials · 2025Review
- Implant Surface Technologies to Promote Spinal Fusion: A Narrative Review.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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) is an advantageous approach for spinal arthrodesis for a wide range of spinal disorders including degenerative, genetic, and traumatic conditions. LLIF techniques have evolved over the past 15 years regarding surgical approach, with concomitant improvements in implant material design. Bioactive materials have been a focus in the development of novel methods, which reduce the risk of subsidence and pseudarthrosis. Historically, polyetheretherketone and titanium cages have been selected for their advantageous biomechanical properties; however, both have their limitations, regarding optimal modulus or osseointegrative properties. Recent modifications to these 2 materials have focused on devising bioactive implants, which may enhance the rate of bony fusion in spinal arthrodesis by addressing the shortcomings of each. Specific emphasis has been placed on developing improvements in surface coating, porosity, microroughness, and nanotopography of interbody cages. This has been coupled with advances in additive manufacturing to generate cages with ideal biomechanical properties. Three-dimensional-printed titanium cages may be particularly beneficial in spinal arthrodesis during LLIF and reduce the historical rates of subsidence and pseudarthrosis by combining a number of these putatively beneficial biomaterial properties.
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.