ArticleActa neurochirurgica2022
PEEK versus titanium-coated PEEK cervical cages: fusion rate.
Article in Acta neurochirurgica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06027827 (Impact of Lateral Bone Grafting With Intraoperative Fusion in ACDF on Clinical Outcomes), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 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.
Impact of Lateral Bone Grafting With Intraoperative Fusion in ACDF on Clinical Outcomes
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Subsidence following cervical discectomy and implant-to-bone ratio.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Trial
- Preoperative three-dimensional simulation and clinical evaluation ofQuantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2025Article
- Titanium-Coated Polyetheretherketone Cages Vs Full Titanium Cages for Stand-Alone 1- or 2-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Comparative Study.International journal of spine surgery · 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
- Impact of Implant Size and Position on Subsidence Degree after Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Radiological and Clinical Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Cervical Sagittal Balance: Impact on Clinical Outcomes and Subsidence in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- Adjacent segment mobility after ACDF considering fusion status at the implant insertion site.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 · 2023Article
- Improvement of the Surface Properties of Polyether Ether Ketone via Arc Evaporation for Biomedical Applications.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Polyetheretherketone development in bone tissue engineering and orthopedic surgery.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Review
- Reliability and Utility of Various Methods for Evaluation of Bone Union after Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Review of anterior cervical diskectomy/fusion (ACDF) using different polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages.Surgical neurology international · 2022Review
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 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is one of the most commonly performed procedures for degenerative cervical disease. The evaluation of fusion status is still not fully standardized, and a variety of measurement methods are used. This study presents our own evaluation of fusion by comparing two types of implants.
methodsA total of 170 disc spaces were operated on in 104 patients using PEEK (polyetheretherketone) cages and titanium-coated (TC) PEEK cages. Patients were assigned to a specific implant using a randomisation table. Fusion status was evaluated based on functional radiographs and CT scans obtained at 12 months post-surgery. Multivariate mixed-effects logistic regression models were performed to assess the association of type of implant with different fusion rates.
resultsAt 12 months post-surgery, CT scans were performed in 86 patients (a total of 144 disc spaces) and conventional radiographs were obtained in 102 (a total of 166 disc spaces). Complete fusion was demonstrated in 101 cases (71.1%), partial fusion in 43 cases (29.9%). There were no cases of absence of fusion. A total of 85 PEEK cages (59%) and 59 TC-PEEK cages (41%) were implanted. For PEEK cages, complete fusion was seen in 75 (88.2%) disc spaces, compared to 26 (44.1%) achieved with TC-PEEK cages. A significantly higher proportion of complete fusions (B = 15.58; P < 0.0001) after 12 months was observed with PEEK implants compared to TC-PEEK implants.
conclusionComplete fusion was noted at 12 months post-surgery significantly more frequently with PEEK implants compared to TC-PEEK implants.
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.