ArticleGlobal spine journal2026
Utilization of Carbon Fiber Spinal Instrumentation in Primary Spinal Tumors: Outcome Analysis from the AO Spine Primary Tumor Research and Outcomes Network.
Article in Global spine journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
24 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BackgroundThe use of carbon fiber-reinforced polyetheretherketone (CFR-PEEK) instrumentation in spinal surgery has emerged as an alternative to traditional titanium-based implants in recent years. This study aims to evaluate the use and performance of carbon fiber instrumentation in patients with primary spinal tumors focusing on adverse event (AE) risk, overall survival and oncologic outcomes.MethodsData were collected from the AO Spine Primary Tumor Research and Outcomes Network (PTRON), a multicenter international registry. The primary endpoint was the incidence of AEs, while secondary endpoints included the risk of developing at least one AE, overall survival, local tumor control, and disease progression.ResultsA total of 359 patients enrolled in the PTRON registry met the inclusion criteria and were included in the study. Among them, 84 receiving carbon fiber implants (23%), 243 titanium implants (68%), and 32 a combination of both (9%). Median follow-up times were 1.9 years (IQR: 0.4-3.0), 1.3 years (IQR: 0.5-2.4) and 1.1 years (IQR: 0.5-1.7), in the carbon fiber, titanium and combination groups, respectively. The estimated risk of having at least one postoperative AE, including construct failures with and without loss of correction, wound infection (deep or superficial), non-union and wound dehiscence, was statistically comparable between patients receiving carbon fiber, titanium or a combination of both carbon fiber and titanium implants (
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.