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 · 2021
Evaluation of cage subsidence in standalone lateral lumbar interbody fusion: novel 3D-printed titanium versus polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Adl Amini Dominik, Okano Ichiro, Oezel Lisa, Zhu Jiaqi, Chiapparelli Erika, Shue Jennifer, Sama Andrew A, Cammisa Frank P, Girardi Federico P, Hughes Alexander P
Аннотация
PURPOSE: This study aims to compare the early subsidence rate (6-12 months) of standalone novel 3D-printed titanium (Ti) versus polyetheretherketone (PEEK) interbody cages after lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF).
METHOD: A retrospective study of 113 patients (186 levels) who underwent LLIF surgery with Ti or PEEK cages was conducted. Early subsidence was measured in each treated level using the Marchi et al. classification in radiographs or CT scans acquired at 6-12 months follow-up. Multivariate logistic regression analyses with generalized mixed models, setting subsidence as the outcome variable and including cage type (Ti vs PEEK) as well as significant and trending variables (p < 0.10) in univariate analyses, were conducted.
RESULTS: In total, 51 female and 62 male patients were analyzed. The median [IQR] age at surgery was 60.0 [51.0-70.0] years. Of the 186 levels, 119 levels were treated using PEEK and 67 levels with Ti cages. The overall subsidence rate for Grades I-III was significantly less in the Ti versus the PEEK group (p = 0.003). For high-grade subsidence (Grade II or III), Ti cages also demonstrated a subsidence rate (3.0%) that was significantly less compared to PEEK cages (18.5%) (p = 0.002). Multivariate analysis showed that patients treated with Ti cages were less likely to develop severe subsidence compared to those treated with PEEK (OR = 0.05, 95% CI = 0.01, 0.30) (p = 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that 3D-printed novel Ti cages had a significantly lower early subsidence rate compared to PEEK cages in standalone LLIF patients.
METHOD: A retrospective study of 113 patients (186 levels) who underwent LLIF surgery with Ti or PEEK cages was conducted. Early subsidence was measured in each treated level using the Marchi et al. classification in radiographs or CT scans acquired at 6-12 months follow-up. Multivariate logistic regression analyses with generalized mixed models, setting subsidence as the outcome variable and including cage type (Ti vs PEEK) as well as significant and trending variables (p < 0.10) in univariate analyses, were conducted.
RESULTS: In total, 51 female and 62 male patients were analyzed. The median [IQR] age at surgery was 60.0 [51.0-70.0] years. Of the 186 levels, 119 levels were treated using PEEK and 67 levels with Ti cages. The overall subsidence rate for Grades I-III was significantly less in the Ti versus the PEEK group (p = 0.003). For high-grade subsidence (Grade II or III), Ti cages also demonstrated a subsidence rate (3.0%) that was significantly less compared to PEEK cages (18.5%) (p = 0.002). Multivariate analysis showed that patients treated with Ti cages were less likely to develop severe subsidence compared to those treated with PEEK (OR = 0.05, 95% CI = 0.01, 0.30) (p = 0.001).
CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that 3D-printed novel Ti cages had a significantly lower early subsidence rate compared to PEEK cages in standalone LLIF patients.