Expandable interbody cages for lumbar spinal fusion: a systematic review.

IF 4.9 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Daniel Orr, Ron Anderson, Anna Jensen, Tyler Peterson, John Edwards, Anton E Bowden
{"title":"Expandable interbody cages for lumbar spinal fusion: a systematic review.","authors":"Daniel Orr, Ron Anderson, Anna Jensen, Tyler Peterson, John Edwards, Anton E Bowden","doi":"10.1016/j.spinee.2025.01.013","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background context: </strong>Since the early 2000s, various expandable spinal fusion cages have been developed to facilitate less invasive procedures, however, expandable cages have often been evaluated as a homogeneous group, neglecting differences in shape, size, material, expandability and lordotic adjustability. This systematic review aimed to comprehensively survey the literature on expandable spinal fusion cages, discuss their differentiating factors, and identify gaps in the literature regarding these devices.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To demonstrate the range of design features included in expandable interbody devices and identify which of these features are associated with improved surgical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Systematic review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. An electronic search of MEDLINE and Embase using the search terms \"lumbar\" AND \"fusion\" AND (\"expandable cage\" OR \"expandable interbody\") including only English language articles that contained sufficient detail to correlate a specific expandable cage design to patient outcomes. Relevant elements, including device design parameters, patient population information, details of the intervention, comparison data, outcome variables, and the timeframe were extracted. Statistical analysis was conducted to correlate patient outcomes with different device features.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>While 387 different articles were initially identified, 49 met all the criteria for inclusion. Design differences contributed to disparate outcomes, with rectangular titanium cages featuring medial-lateral and vertical expansion and continuous lordotic adjustability being correlated with significantly improved patient-reported outcomes. The surgical approach and location were also found to be correlated with patient outcomes, indicating that confounding factors are present.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We recommend that expandable cage technologies not be considered a homogenous group, as long-term outcomes likely are dependent upon specific design characteristics. Categorizing devices based on design features such as material composition, shape, vertical expandability, horizontal expandability, and restoration of segmental lordosis may allow for more rapid identification of device characteristics associated with better outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":49484,"journal":{"name":"Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2025.01.013","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background context: Since the early 2000s, various expandable spinal fusion cages have been developed to facilitate less invasive procedures, however, expandable cages have often been evaluated as a homogeneous group, neglecting differences in shape, size, material, expandability and lordotic adjustability. This systematic review aimed to comprehensively survey the literature on expandable spinal fusion cages, discuss their differentiating factors, and identify gaps in the literature regarding these devices.

Purpose: To demonstrate the range of design features included in expandable interbody devices and identify which of these features are associated with improved surgical outcomes.

Study design: Systematic review.

Methods: The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. An electronic search of MEDLINE and Embase using the search terms "lumbar" AND "fusion" AND ("expandable cage" OR "expandable interbody") including only English language articles that contained sufficient detail to correlate a specific expandable cage design to patient outcomes. Relevant elements, including device design parameters, patient population information, details of the intervention, comparison data, outcome variables, and the timeframe were extracted. Statistical analysis was conducted to correlate patient outcomes with different device features.

Results: While 387 different articles were initially identified, 49 met all the criteria for inclusion. Design differences contributed to disparate outcomes, with rectangular titanium cages featuring medial-lateral and vertical expansion and continuous lordotic adjustability being correlated with significantly improved patient-reported outcomes. The surgical approach and location were also found to be correlated with patient outcomes, indicating that confounding factors are present.

Conclusions: We recommend that expandable cage technologies not be considered a homogenous group, as long-term outcomes likely are dependent upon specific design characteristics. Categorizing devices based on design features such as material composition, shape, vertical expandability, horizontal expandability, and restoration of segmental lordosis may allow for more rapid identification of device characteristics associated with better outcomes.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Spine Journal
Spine Journal 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
680
审稿时长
13.1 weeks
期刊介绍: The Spine Journal, the official journal of the North American Spine Society, is an international and multidisciplinary journal that publishes original, peer-reviewed articles on research and treatment related to the spine and spine care, including basic science and clinical investigations. It is a condition of publication that manuscripts submitted to The Spine Journal have not been published, and will not be simultaneously submitted or published elsewhere. The Spine Journal also publishes major reviews of specific topics by acknowledged authorities, technical notes, teaching editorials, and other special features, Letters to the Editor-in-Chief are encouraged.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信