SynthesisNeurosurgical review2025
Clinical and radiological outcomes of titanium cage versus polyetheretherketone cage in lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Neurosurgical review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Vertebral metastatic disease: A paradigm shift.Neuro-oncology advances · 2026Review
- Review
- Long-term Performance and Durability of Biomaterials and Implant Designs in Total Joint Arthroplasty and Spinal Fusion.Journal of orthopaedics and sports medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of bony fusion after posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Brain & spine · 2026Review
- Evaluating the Efficacy of a Novel Titanium Cage System in ALIF and LLIF: A Retrospective Clinical and Radiographic Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Personalized porous tantalum implants crafted via 3D printing: new horizons in complex cervical-thoracic spinal fusion.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Interbody cages are widely used in lumbar interbody fusion (LIF). The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes between titanium (Ti) and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages in patients underwent LIF. A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library databases until October 2023. Studies comparing the clinical and radiological outcomes of Ti and PEEK cages in LIF were included. Subgroup analyses was performed to differentiate between patients who had three-dimensional printed titanium (3D-Ti) cage and non-3D Ti cage. A total of 19 studies with 820 Ti cages patients (including 476 patients with 3D-Ti cages) and 1237 PEEK cages patients were reviewed. Ti cages demonstrated advantages of better fusion rate, and lower cage subsidence and reoperation rate than PEEK cages. Patients with 3D-Ti cages showed significantly superior fusion rate, less cage subsidence rate and reduced reoperation rate by conducting subgroup analysis. No significant difference was found between non-3D Ti cages and PEEK cages in fusion, cage subsidence and reoperation rate. Both Ti and PEEK cages patients had similar postoperative visual analogue score, Oswestry disability index score, anterior disc height, intervertebral foraminal height, global lumbar lordosis and segmental lordosis. 3D-Ti cages have advantages over PEEK cages in promoting fusion rate, reducing risk of cage subsidence and lowering reoperation rate. 3D-Ti cage may be a superior implant compared with PEEK cage in LIF.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40075000What 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.