ArticleAsian spine journal2024
Innovative Developments in Lumbar Interbody Cage Materials and Design: A Comprehensive Narrative Review.
Article in Asian spine journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Are Ceramic Cages an Option for Lumbar Interbody Fusion? A Comparative Biomechanical Numerical Study.JOR spine · 2026Article
- Preoperative sacroiliac joint degeneration can predict changes in pelvic incidence and functional outcomes following lumbar fusion.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
- Zinc and metformin co-functionalized polyetheretherketone: A novel dental implant material tailored for the elderly.Journal of advanced research · 2026Article
- Integrating Structures and Biology: Cellular and Molecular Interactions with Functionally Graded Spinal Cage Designs.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Enhanced Early Stabilization and Improved Clinical Outcomes by Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Contralateral Facet Fusion Compared With Conventional Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion.Journal of Korean medical science · 2026Article
- Three-Dimensional Printing of a Spinal Interbody: Design Principles, Biomaterials, and Translational Considerations.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- Observational Comparative Study for Surgical Outcomes of One- or Two-Level Lumbar Fusion Surgery Between Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion and Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of the porosity and structural stability of 3D-printed porous titanium pedicle screws using finite element analysis.Biomedical engineering letters · 2026Article
- 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
- Is Ti-Coated PEEK Superior to PEEK for Lumbar and Cervical Fusion Procedures? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Current Applications and Future Directions of Technologies Used in Adult Deformity Surgery for Personalized Alignment: A Narrative Review.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Review
- Unilateral biportal endoscopy for minimally invasive spinal fusion: Advancements in biomaterials and clinical outcome optimization.World journal of orthopedics · 2025Review
- Biomaterials and Tissue Engineering in Neurosurgery: Current Innovations and Future Directions.Biotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2025Review
- Innovative 3D-printed porous tantalum cage with non-window design to accelerate spinal fusion: A proof-of-concept study.Materials today. Bio · 2025Article
- The Future of Bone Repair: Emerging Technologies and Biomaterials in Bone Regeneration.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Effects of Vacuum Phenomenon on Cage Subsidence and Fusion Outcomes in Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Biportal Endoscopic TLIF With an Expandable Cage: Technical Note and Preliminary Results in Terms of Segmental Lordosis Achievement and Disc Height Elevation.International journal of spine surgery · 2024Article
- Biportal Endoscopic Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: How to Improve Fusion Rate?International journal of spine surgery · 2024Article
- Relationship of the Iliac Crest Height with Subsidence After Oblique Lateral Interbody Fusion at L4-5: A Quantitative and Categorical Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This review comprehensively examines the evolution and current state of interbody cage technology for lumbar interbody fusion (LIF). This review highlights the biomechanical and clinical implications of the transition from traditional static cage designs to advanced expandable variants for spinal surgery. The review begins by exploring the early developments in cage materials, highlighting the roles of titanium and polyetheretherketone in the advancement of LIF techniques. This review also discusses the strengths and limitations of these materials, leading to innovations in surface modifications and the introduction of novel materials, such as tantalum, as alternative materials. Advancements in three-dimensional printing and surface modification technologies form a significant part of this review, emphasizing the role of these technologies in enhancing the biomechanical compatibility and osseointegration of interbody cages. In addition, this review explores the increase in biodegradable and composite materials such as polylactic acid and polycaprolactone, addressing their potential to mitigate long-term implant-related complications. A critical evaluation of static and expandable cages is presented, including their respective clinical and radiological outcomes. While static cages have been a mainstay of LIF, expandable cages are noted for their adaptability to the patient's anatomy, reducing complications such as cage subsidence. However, this review highlights the ongoing debate and the lack of conclusive evidence regarding the superiority of either cage type in terms of clinical outcomes. Finally, this review proposes future directions for cage technology, focusing on the integration of bioactive substances and multifunctional coatings and the development of patient-specific implants. These advancements aim to further enhance the efficacy, safety, and personalized approach of spinal fusion surgeries. Moreover, this review offers a nuanced understanding of the evolving landscape of cage technology in LIF and provides insights into current practices and future possibilities in spinal surgery.
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.