Can activated titanium interbody cages accelerate or enhance spinal fusion? a review of the literature and a design for clinical trials
Journal of Materials Science: Materials in Medicine, ISSN: 1573-4838, Vol: 33, Issue: 1, Page: 1
2022
- 9Citations
- 115Usage
- 35Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations9
- Citation Indexes9
- Usage115
- Downloads96
- Abstract Views19
- Captures35
- Readers35
- 35
Review Description
While spinal interbody cage options have proliferated in the past decade, relatively little work has been done to explore the comparative potential of biomaterial technologies in promoting stable fusion. Innovations such as micro-etching and nano-architectural designs have shown purported benefits in in vitro studies, but lack clinical data describing their optimal implementation. Here, we critically assess the pre-clinical data supportive of various commercially available interbody cage biomaterial, topographical, and structural designs. We describe in detail the osteointegrative and osteoconductive benefits conferred by these modifications with a focus on polyetheretherketone (PEEK) and titanium (Ti) interbody implants. Further, we describe the rationale and design for two randomized controlled trials, which aim to address the paucity of clinical data available by comparing interbody fusion outcomes between either PEEK or activated Ti lumbar interbody cages. Utilizing dual-energy computed tomography (DECT), these studies will evaluate the relative implant-bone integration and fusion rates achieved by either micro-etched Ti or standard PEEK interbody devices. Taken together, greater understanding of the relative osseointegration profile at the implant–bone interface of cages with distinct topographies will be crucial in guiding the rational design of further studies and innovations. [Figure not available: see fulltext.]
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85121428515&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10856-021-06628-1; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34921610; https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10856-021-06628-1; https://uknowledge.uky.edu/neurosurgery_facpub/14; https://uknowledge.uky.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=neurosurgery_facpub; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10856-021-06628-1; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10856-021-06628-1
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know