Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39131413›Full record

ArticleSpine surgery and related research2024

Clinical Effectiveness of Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Using Tritanium C Anterior Cervical Cage vs. PEEK Cage.

Andrew J Croft, Abigail J Wiedel, Anthony M Steinle, Omar Zakieh, Jacquelyn S Pennings, Claudia Davidson, Scott L Zuckerman, Amir M Abtahi, Byron F Stephens

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Spine surgery and related research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. 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 · 2026
    Article
  2. Observational
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Andrew J CroftDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, USA.
Abigail J WiedelSteamboat Orthopaedics and Spine Institute, Steamboat Springs, USA.
Anthony M SteinleDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, USA.
Omar ZakiehDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, USA.
Jacquelyn S PenningsDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, USA.
Claudia DavidsonDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, USA.
Scott L ZuckermanDepartment of Neurological Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, USA.
Amir M AbtahiDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, USA.
Byron F StephensDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) has proven to be a clinically efficient and cost-effective method for treating patients with degenerative cervical spine conditions. New intervertebral implant products are being developed to improve fusion and stability while decreasing complications. This study assesses the effectiveness of Tritanium C (Tri-C) Anterior Cervical Cage (Stryker) in the treatment of degenerative disk disease (DDD) of the cervical spine compared with polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages. Methods: A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using data prospectively collected from two institutions. Patients who underwent ACDFs for DDD using either the Tri-C cage or PEEK cage were identified. The patients' demographics, comorbidities, operative variables, and baseline patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected. PROs included the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and numeric rating scale (NRS) for neck and arm pain. The primary outcomes included 3- and 12-month PROs as well as the rates of 90-day readmission, 90-day reoperation, and perioperative complication. The radiographic outcomes included rates of subsidence, cage movement, and successful fusion within 12 months. Multivariate linear regression models were run to identify variables predictive of 12-month PROs. Results: A total of 275 patients who underwent ACDF were included in this study and were divided into two groups: PEEK (n=213) and Tri-C (n=62). Both groups showed improvement in neck and arm pain and NDI postoperatively. When Tri-C and PEEK were compared, no significant differences were observed in the 3- or 12-month changes in neck or arm pain or NDI. Furthermore, there were no differences in the rates of 90-day readmission, 90-day reoperation, and perioperative complication. Regression analysis revealed that Tri-C vs. PEEK was not a significant predictor of any outcome. Conclusions: Our results indicate that the use of porous titanium Tri-C cage during ACDFs is an effective method for managing cervical DDD in terms of PROs, perioperative morbidity, and radiologic parameters. No significant difference was observed in any clinical outcome between patients undergoing ACDF using the Tri-C cage and those in whom the PEEK cage was used. Level of Evidence: III.

Indexed as

Anterior Cervical Discectomy and FusionClinical OutcomesFusionInterbody FusionPEEK CageSubsidenceTritanium C Cage

Identifiers

PMID39131413
PMCPMC11310537

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.