A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3145
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Clinical and radiological outcomes of titanium cage versus polyetheretherketone cage in lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. | LitMetric

Clinical and radiological outcomes of titanium cage versus polyetheretherketone cage in lumbar interbody fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Neurosurg Rev

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, The Affiliated Traditional Chinese Medicine Hospital, Southwest Medical University, Luzhou, 646000, Sichuan, China.

Published: March 2025

Interbody cages are widely used in lumbar interbody fusion (LIF). The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes between titanium (Ti) and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages in patients underwent LIF. A literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane library databases until October 2023. Studies comparing the clinical and radiological outcomes of Ti and PEEK cages in LIF were included. Subgroup analyses was performed to differentiate between patients who had three-dimensional printed titanium (3D-Ti) cage and non-3D Ti cage. A total of 19 studies with 820 Ti cages patients (including 476 patients with 3D-Ti cages) and 1237 PEEK cages patients were reviewed. Ti cages demonstrated advantages of better fusion rate, and lower cage subsidence and reoperation rate than PEEK cages. Patients with 3D-Ti cages showed significantly superior fusion rate, less cage subsidence rate and reduced reoperation rate by conducting subgroup analysis. No significant difference was found between non-3D Ti cages and PEEK cages in fusion, cage subsidence and reoperation rate. Both Ti and PEEK cages patients had similar postoperative visual analogue score, Oswestry disability index score, anterior disc height, intervertebral foraminal height, global lumbar lordosis and segmental lordosis. 3D-Ti cages have advantages over PEEK cages in promoting fusion rate, reducing risk of cage subsidence and lowering reoperation rate. 3D-Ti cage may be a superior implant compared with PEEK cage in LIF.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10143-025-03453-wDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

peek cages
28
cages patients
20
cage subsidence
16
reoperation rate
16
cages
14
clinical radiological
12
radiological outcomes
12
3d-ti cages
12
fusion rate
12
cage
10

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!