Literature DB >> 25015180

Comparison of fusion rates following transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion using polyetheretherketone cages or titanium cages with transpedicular instrumentation.

Osamu Nemoto1, Takashi Asazuma, Yoshiyuki Yato, Hideaki Imabayashi, Hiroki Yasuoka, Akira Fujikawa.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Compared to titanium cage, polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage with pedicle screw fixation has been increasingly used in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF). However, there is insufficient evidence supporting the superiority of PEEK cages over titanium cages as optimal TLIF spacers. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients at a 2-year follow-up after undergoing instrumented TLIF in which either a PEEK cage or a titanium cage was implanted.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed prospectively collected 48 patients who underwent single-level TLIF in which the first 23 patients received a titanium cage and the 25 patients received a PEEK cage. Patient demographics, clinical outcomes, and radiographic imaging were studied.
RESULTS: Improvement of clinical outcomes was comparable between the two groups. Based on the criteria using computed tomography, 96 % in the Titanium group and 64 % in the PEEK group showed fusion at 12 months. At 24 months, fusion rate in the Titanium group was increased to 100 %, while PEEK group showed 76 % of fusion rate. In the PEEK group, vertebral osteolysis was noted in 60 % of the cases with nonunion. This abnormal finding was not observed in the Titanium group. Vertebral osteolysis was significantly associated with nonunion.
CONCLUSIONS: The superiority of PEEK cages over titanium cages for bony fusion was not demonstrated. Additionally, we found unfavorable radiographic findings in the cases with a PEEK cage, which may lead to nonunion. Improvement in biocompatibility of a PEEK cage will be needed to increase the fusion rate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25015180     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-014-3466-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  17 in total

1.  Biomechanical rationale for using polyetheretherketone (PEEK) spacers for lumbar interbody fusion-A finite element study.

Authors:  Sasidhar Vadapalli; Koichi Sairyo; Vijay K Goel; Matt Robon; Ashok Biyani; Ashutosh Khandha; Nabil A Ebraheim
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2006-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Does the formation of vertebral endplate cysts predict nonunion after lumbar interbody fusion?

Authors:  Shunsuke Fujibayashi; Mitsuru Takemoto; Masanori Izeki; Yoshimitsu Takahashi; Takeo Nakayama; Masashi Neo
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2012-09-01       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Lumbar interbody fusion using the Brantigan I/F cage for posterior lumbar interbody fusion and the variable pedicle screw placement system: two-year results from a Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption clinical trial.

Authors:  J W Brantigan; A D Steffee; M L Lewis; L M Quinn; J M Persenaire
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-06-01       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Osteoblasts exhibit a more differentiated phenotype and increased bone morphogenetic protein production on titanium alloy substrates than on poly-ether-ether-ketone.

Authors:  Rene Olivares-Navarrete; Rolando A Gittens; Jennifer M Schneider; Sharon L Hyzy; David A Haithcock; Peter F Ullrich; Zvi Schwartz; Barbara D Boyan
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2012-03-15       Impact factor: 4.166

5.  Radiographic and CT evaluation of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2-assisted spinal interbody fusion.

Authors:  Anil Sethi; Joseph Craig; Stephen Bartol; Wei Chen; Mark Jacobson; Mark Jacobsen; Chad Coe; Rahul Vaidya
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 3.959

6.  Can lumbar spine radiographs accurately determine fusion in postoperative patients? Correlation of routine radiographs with a second surgical look at lumbar fusions.

Authors:  S L Blumenthal; K Gill
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Osteolysis in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with bone morphogenetic protein-2.

Authors:  Jeffrey B Knox; Joseph M Dai; Joseph Orchowski
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2011-04-15       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Complications in the use of rhBMP-2 in PEEK cages for interbody spinal fusions.

Authors:  Rahul Vaidya; Anil Sethi; Stephen Bartol; Mark Jacobson; Chad Coe; Joseph G Craig
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2008-12

9.  Evaluation of lumbar spine fusion. Plain radiographs versus direct surgical exploration and observation.

Authors:  A P Kant; W J Daum; S M Dean; T Uchida
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1995-11-01       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Posterior lumbar interbody fusion using rhBMP-2.

Authors:  Hans Jörg Meisel; Mark Schnöring; Christian Hohaus; Yvonne Minkus; Andre Beier; Timothy Ganey; Ulrich Mansmann
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-10-07       Impact factor: 3.134

View more
  31 in total

1.  PEEK versus metal cages in posterior lumbar interbody fusion: a clinical and radiological comparative study.

Authors:  F Cuzzocrea; A Ivone; E Jannelli; A Fioruzzi; E Ferranti; R Vanelli; F Benazzo
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2018-12-10

Review 2.  [Intervertebral cages from a biomechanical point of view].

Authors:  W Schmoelz; A Keiler
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 1.087

Review 3.  Advances in Spinal Interbody Cages.

Authors:  Sukrit Jain; Adam E M Eltorai; Roy Ruttiman; Alan H Daniels
Journal:  Orthop Surg       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 2.071

Review 4.  Lumbar interbody fusion: recent advances in surgical techniques and bone healing strategies.

Authors:  Bin Meng; Joshua Bunch; Douglas Burton; Jinxi Wang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2020-09-19       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 5.  History of Spinal Fusion: Where We Came from and Where We Are Going.

Authors:  Sohrab Virk; Sheeraz Qureshi; Harvinder Sandhu
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2020-02-25

6.  Is the Cage an Additional Hardware in Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Low Grade Spondylolisthesis? A Prospective Study.

Authors:  Ramachandran Govindasamy; Prince Solomon; Deepak Sugumar; James J Gnanadoss; Yuvaraja Murugan; Syed Najimudeen
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2017-05-01

7.  Clinical outcomes for lumbar fusion using silicon nitride versus other biomaterials.

Authors:  Graham C Calvert; George VanBuren Huffmon; William M Rambo; Micah W Smith; Bryan J McEntire; B Sonny Bal
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-03

Review 8.  Interbody Fusions in the Lumbar Spine: A Review.

Authors:  Ravi Verma; Sohrab Virk; Sheeraz Qureshi
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2020-01-13

9.  Factors important in bone union after posterior lumbar interbody fusion using the cortical bone trajectory technique.

Authors:  Yoshihide Yanai; Keitaro Matsukawa; Takashi Kato; Yoshiyuki Yato
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-12

10.  Two-year results of a double-blind multicenter randomized controlled non-inferiority trial of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) versus silicon nitride spinal fusion cages in patients with symptomatic degenerative lumbar disc disorders.

Authors:  Bryan J McEntire; Greg Maslin; B Sonny Bal
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.