ReviewBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Clinical Evidence of Wear Occurrence in CFR-PEEK and Metallic Osteosynthesis Implants: A Systematic Literature Review.
Review in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
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.
Funding
Abstract
Carbon fiber-reinforced polyetheretherketone (CFR-PEEK) as an alternative to metallics in orthopedic implants offers biomechanical and radiological advantages. However, the extent of wear particle generation and its clinical impact are unclear. This systematic review evaluates clinical evidence of wear in fracture fixation devices. A systematic search was conducted to identify clinical studies reporting wear of metallic and CFR-PEEK implants used in extremities. Nineteen studies were included: three prospective cohorts, eight retrospective cohorts, one case series, and six case reports. Among 208 fixation plates, 43 were CFR-PEEK and all 93 intramedullary nails were metallic. Risk of bias ranged from low to serious, mainly due to selection bias. Wear-related complications were reported for both materials. Metallic implants showed elevated serum ion levels, metallic debris in tissues, and, in some cases, metallosis. CFR-PEEK implants showed limited evidence of carbon fiber fragments near implants. One comparative study reported higher inflammatory responses in CFR-PEEK explants, though no direct link between debris and implant removal was found. Both metallic and CFR-PEEK fracture fixation devices generate wear particles, which may induce biological responses. However, wear-related complications appear rare, especially with validated implant designs, and clinical significance of wear debris remains limited.
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.