Outcome of Ti/PEEK Versus PEEK Cages in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

20Citations
Citations of this article
34Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Study Design: Retrospective case-control study. Objectives: This study aims to present the clinical and radiographical outcomes of the titanium-polyetheretherketone (Ti/PEEK) composite cage compared to those of the standard PEEK cage in patients receiving minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (MI-TLIF). Methods: Patients receiving 1 level MI-TLIF between October 2015 and October 2017 were included with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. The patients were segregated into 2 groups; Ti/PEEK group and PEEK group. Each patient was propensity-matched using preoperative age, sex, and body mass index. Early fusion rate was evaluated by computed tomography at postoperative 6 months. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. Results: After matching, there were 27 patients included in each group. The demographics, diagnosis, and surgical details were not significantly different between the 2 groups. The 6-month rate was 88.9% in Ti/PEEK group. The fusion rate and cage subsidence rate had no difference between the 2 groups. The complication rate in the Ti/PEEK group was comparable to that in the PEEK group. There was no difference in VAS and ODI scores during a 2-year follow-up period. Conclusions: The use of Ti/PEEK composite cage was as safe and effective as the use of PEEK cage in MI-TLIF. The 6-month fusion rate was 88.9%. Our finding revealed comparable clinical results for surgeons using Ti/PEEK composite cages in MI-TLIF compared to those using the PEEK cage.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Yao, Y. C., Chou, P. H., Lin, H. H., Wang, S. T., & Chang, M. C. (2023). Outcome of Ti/PEEK Versus PEEK Cages in Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion. Global Spine Journal, 13(2), 472–478. https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682211000323

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free