ArticleBrain & spine2022
Titanium versus polyetheretherketone versus structural allograft in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A systematic review.
Article in Brain & spine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application of nano-hydroxyapatite matrix graft in inter-vertebral fusion therapy: a meta-analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Pooled it
- Systematic Review of Bioactive Glass Cages in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion.International journal of spine surgery · 2026Article
- Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion without anchoring: a multicenter comparison of stand-alone porous titanium versus anchored PEEK interbody cages.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
- Construct length rather than interbody spacer material is associated with reoperation after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026Article
- Expandable titanium interbody cage with adjustable height and lordosis for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a clinical and radiological study.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2025Article
- Article
- Treating Multilevel Cervical Degenerative Disk Disease in a Patient With Stage IV Lung Cancer With Notable Comorbidities Using a Drug Eluting Biomaterial: A Case Report.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2024Article
- Interim 1-Year Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes Following Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Using Hydroxyapatite-Infused Polyetheretherketone Interbody Cages.International journal of spine surgery · 2024Article
- Anterior cervical decompression and fusion at one and two levels: trends and factors associated with structural allograft versus synthetic cages.North American Spine Society journal · 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a common procedure to address cervical spine pathology. The most common grafts used are titanium, polyetheretherketone (PEEK), or structural allograft. Comparison of fusion rate is difficult due to non-standardized methods of assessment. We stratified studies by method of fusion assessment and performed a systematic review of fusion rates for titanium, PEEK, and allograft. Research question: Which of the common implants used in ACDF has the highest reported rate of fusion? Materials and methods: An experienced librarian performed a five-database systematic search for published articles between 01/01/1990 and 08/07/2021. Studies performed in adults with at least 1 year of radiographic follow up were included. The primary outcome was the rate of fusion. Fusion criteria were stratified into 6 classes based upon best practices. Results: 34 studies met inclusion criteria. 10 studies involving 924 patients with 1094 cervical levels, used tier 1 fusion criteria and 6 studies (309 patients and 367 levels) used tier 2 fusion criteria. Forty seven percent of the studies used class 3-6 fusion criteria and were not included in the analysis. Fusion rates did differ between titanium (avg. 87.3%, range 84%-100%), PEEK (avg. 92.8%, range 62%-100%), and structural allograft (avg. 94.67%, range 82%-100%). Discussion and conclusion: After stratifying studies by fusion criteria, significant heterogeneity in study design and fusion assessment prohibited the performance of a meta-analysis. Fusion rate did not differ by graft type. Important surgical goals aside from fusion rate, such as degree of deformity correction, could not be assessed. Future studies with standardized high-quality methods of assessing fusion, are required.
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.