ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2025
Clinical and biomechanical effects of bone-implant interface gap after cervical disc replacement.
Article in 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, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effect of Keeping Caspar Retractor During Prestige LP Cervical Disc Implantation on Intra- and Postoperative Outcomes.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeDue to the irregularity of cervical inferior endplate morphology among individuals and segments, a bone-implant interface (BII) gap is usually unavoidable between the prosthesis and endplate after cervical disc replacement (CDR). This study aimed to investigate the clinical and biomechanical effects of the BII gap after CDR.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the clinical and radiological data of 180 patients who underwent 1-level or 2-level CDR. Cervical sagittal parameters, implant subsidence and migration, heterotopic ossification (HO) were evaluated through lateral radiographs. Endplate morphology was classified into three types according to the position of concavity apex: (I) posterior, (II) central, and (III) anterior. CDR finite element models with and without BII gap were developed based on type II endplate to analyze predictions of relative stress distributions, micromotions and associated risks for subsidence at BII.
resultsNo statistical differences in clinical outcomes and the incidence of implant subsidence or migration between two groups were noted. The proportion of BII gaps after CDR was significantly larger in segments with type I endplate morphology (68.0%) (P = 0.001). The incidence of HO (67.8% vs. 53.5%, P = 0.026), high-grade HO (21.2% vs. 11.4%, P = 0.044), and posterior HO (63.6% vs. 49.1%, P = 0.027) in the gap group was significantly higher. There were obvious stress concentration areas in the posterior region of the endplate in the gap model. The risk for subsidence of the gap model was larger than non-gap model in flexion, extension, and lateral bending.
conclusionThe BII gap was common after CDR. The incidences of posterior HO and high-grade HO were higher in the segments with BII gap. Although the BII gap altered the regional biomechanical environment, no effects on the clinical outcomes and risk for implant-related complications were noted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40237869What 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.