Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39516026›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2024

Nonmetallic Carbon Fiber-Reinforced Polyetheretherketone Implants Vs Titanium Implants: Analysis of Clinical Outcomes and Influence on Postoperative Radiotherapy Planning in Metastatic Spine Tumor Surgery.

Naresh Kumar, Priyambada Kumar, Gabriel Leow Zihui, Leon Seow, Shen Liang, Si Jian Hui, Rohan Parihar, James Hallinan, Balamurugan Vellayappan, Jiong Hao Jonathan Tan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Safety and efficacy of carbon fiber-reinforced polyetheretherketone implants in primary and metastatic spinal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.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
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

10 authors.

Naresh KumarDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery (Spine division), National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore dosksn@nus.edu.sg.
Priyambada KumarDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery (Spine division), National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Gabriel Leow ZihuiDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Leon SeowDepartment of Radiation Oncology, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Shen LiangBiostatistics Unit, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Si Jian HuiDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Rohan PariharDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery (Spine division), National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
James HallinanDepartment of Diagnostic Imaging, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Balamurugan VellayappanDepartment of Radiation Oncology, National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Jiong Hao Jonathan TanDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery (Spine division), National University Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTitanium has been the conventional implant material of choice for fixation in both primary and metastatic spine tumor surgeries (MSTS). However, these implants result in artifact generation during postoperative computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging, resulting in poor planning of radiotherapy (RT) and suboptimal tumor surveillance. Carbon fiber-reinforced polyetheretherketone (CFR-PEEK) implants have gained momentum for instrumentation in MSTS due to their radiolucent properties. In this study, the perioperative outcomes, postoperative imaging artifacts, and dosimetric data of CFR-PEEK implants to titanium implants were compared to assess for potential benefits in postoperative RT planning in patients undergoing MSTS.

methodsThis is a retrospective study involving 62 patients who underwent operations for MSTS. The cohort of CFR-PEEK fixations (

resultsBoth groups had similar clinical outcomes for pain and overall survival predictability preoperatively (

conclusionOur study confirms that CFR-PEEK screws significantly reduce artifact generation and the time taken to contour them during postoperative RT planning while delivering equivalent clinical and functional outcomes as compared with standard titanium implants. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2:

Indexed as

adjuvant radiotherapyCFR-PEEKmetastatic spine tumour surgery

Identifiers

PMID39516026
PMCPMC11616397

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.