ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2022
Biomaterials for Interbody Fusion in Bone Tissue Engineering.
Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Meta-analysis of the best exercise mode and dose study for improving spinal health.Frontiers in sports and active living · 2025Pooled it
- Accuracy and reliability of radiological methods for assessing fusion rates in patients undergoing spinal arthrodesis and stabilization: a systematic review of the past 10 years.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Optimal cage biomaterials for fusion and subsidence outcomes in lumbar spinal fusion: a network meta-analysis of 4881 patients.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 · 2026Review
- [Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2026Article
- Three-Dimensional Printing of a Spinal Interbody: Design Principles, Biomaterials, and Translational Considerations.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- PRP-related biomaterials enhance bone and nerve repair.Materials today. Bio · 2026Review
- Clinical evaluation of a growth factor bioavailability enhanced allograft in anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF).Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2025Article
- Section on innovative spine research and novel technologies: fusion cage design, materials, and coatings: Science versus hype.North American Spine Society journal · 2025Article
- Advancements in biomaterials and bioactive solutions for lumbar spine fusion cages: Current trends and future perspectives.Bioactive materials · 2025Review
- Efficacy of Allograft Versus Bioactive Glass-Ceramic Cage in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Randomized Controlled Study.Global spine journal · 2025Article
- BIOABSORBABLE CAGES IN SPINAL FUSION IN AN ANIMAL MODEL: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS.Acta ortopedica brasileira · 2025Review
- Efficacy of Stand-Alone Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion With PEEK Cages, BMP-2, and Allografts for Treating Discogenic Low Back Pain: Assessing Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes.International journal of spine surgery · 2024Article
- Article
- Radiological evaluation of fusion patterns after Lateral Lumbar Interbody fusion with 3D-printed porous titanium cages vs. conventional titanium cages.Frontiers in surgery · 2024Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, interbody fusion cages have played an important role in interbody fusion surgery for treating diseases like disc protrusion and spondylolisthesis. However, traditional cages cannot achieve satisfactory results due to their unreasonable design, poor material biocompatibility, and induced osteogenesis ability, limiting their application. There are currently 3 ways to improve the fusion effect, as follows. First, the interbody fusion cage is designed to facilitate bone ingrowth through the preliminary design. Second, choose interbody fusion cages made of different materials to meet the variable needs of interbody fusion. Finally, complete post-processing steps, such as coating the designed cage, to achieve a suitable osseointegration microstructure, and add other bioactive materials to achieve the most suitable biological microenvironment of bone tissue and improve the fusion effect. The focus of this review is on the design methods of interbody fusion cages, a comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of various materials, the influence of post-processing techniques and additional materials on interbody fusion, and the prospects for the future development of interbody fusion cages.
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.