ArticleGlobal spine journal2024
Biomechanical Comparison of Subsidence Between Patient-Specific and Non-Patient-Specific Lumbar Interbody Fusion Cages.
Article in Global spine journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Are Ceramic Cages an Option for Lumbar Interbody Fusion? A Comparative Biomechanical Numerical Study.JOR spine · 2026Article
- Material and Geometric Innovations in Lumbar and Cervical Interbody Devices: A Systematic Scoping Review.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Review
- Ex vivo mechanical evaluation of anatomically and mechanically conforming patient-specific lumbar spinal fusion cages designed by full-scale topology optimization.North American Spine Society journal · 2026Article
- Experimental quantification of resistance to subsidence conferred by endplate-specific expandable implants in anterior lumbar interbody fusion.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- Utility of Enabling Technologies in Spinal Deformity Surgery: Optimizing Surgical Planning and Intraoperative Execution to Maximize Patient Outcomes.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Development and internal validation of a risk score for subsidence of expandable spacers in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) surgery.Brain & spine · 2025Article
- Patient-specific implants and spinal alignment outcomes.North American Spine Society journal · 2024Article
- Tomographic Assessment of Fusion Rate, Implant-Endplate Contact Area, Subsidence, and Alignment With Lumbar Personalized Interbody Implants at 1-Year Follow-Up.International journal of spine surgery · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designBiomechanical study.
objectivesSeveral strategies to improve the surface of contact between an interbody device and the endplate have been employed to attenuate the risk of cage subsidence. 3D-printed patient-specific cages have been presented as a promising alternative to help mitigate that risk, but there is a lack of biomechanical evidence supporting their use. We aim to evaluate the biomechanical performance of 3D printed patient-specific lumbar interbody fusion cages in relation to commercial cages in preventing subsidence.
methodsA cadaveric model is used to investigate the possible advantage of 3D printed patient-specific cages matching the endplate contour using CT-scan imaging in preventing subsidence in relation to commercially available cages (Medtronic Fuse and Capstone). Peak failure force and stiffness were analyzed outcomes for both comparison groups.
resultsPS cages resulted in significantly higher construct stiffness when compared to both commercial cages tested (>59%). PS cage peak failure force was 64% higher when compared to Fuse cage (
conclusionsPatient-specific cages required higher compression forces to produce failure and increased the cage-endplate construct' stiffness, decreasing subsidence risk.
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.