Evolution of materials for implants in metastatic spine disease till date – Have we found an ideal material?
Radiotherapy and Oncology, ISSN: 0167-8140, Vol: 163, Page: 93-104
2021
- 14Citations
- 27Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting 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
- Citations14
- Citation Indexes14
- 14
- CrossRef10
- Captures27
- Readers27
- 27
Review Description
“Metastatic Spine Disease” (MSD) often requires surgical intervention and instrumentation with spinal implants. Ti6Al4V is widely used in metastatic spine tumor surgery (MSTS) and is the current implant material of choice due to improved biocompatibility, mechanical properties, and compatibility with imaging modalities compared to stainless steel. However, it is still not the ideal implant material due to the following issues. Ti6Al4V implants cause stress-shielding as their Young’s modulus (110 gigapascal [GPa]) is higher than cortical bone (17–21 GPa). Ti6Al4V also generates artifacts on CT and MRI, which interfere with the process of postoperative radiotherapy (RT), including treatment planning and delivery. Similarly, charged particle therapy is hindered in the presence of Ti6Al4V. In addition, artifacts on CT and MRI may result in delayed recognition of tumor recurrence and postoperative complications. In comparison, polyether-ether-ketone (PEEK) is a promising alternative. PEEK has a low Young’s modulus (3.6 GPa), which results in optimal load-sharing and produces minimal artifacts on imaging with less hinderance on postoperative RT. However, PEEK is bioinert and unable to provide sufficient stability in the immediate postoperative period. This issue may possibly be mitigated by combining PEEK with other materials to form composites or through surface modification, although further research is required in these areas. With the increasing incidence of MSD, it is an opportune time for the development of spinal implants that possess all the ideal material properties for use in MSTS. Our review will explore whether there is a current ideal implant material, available alternatives and whether these require further investigation.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167814021067013; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2021.08.007; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85113916432&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34419506; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0167814021067013; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2021.08.007
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know