颈椎前路椎间盘切除术融合后椎笼对沉降的影响:一项回顾性研究。

IF 2.7 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Pierce J Ferriter, Suhas K Etigunta, Akiro H Duey, Christopher Gonzalez, Katrina Nietsch, Ashley M Rosenberg, Bashar Zaidat, Avanish Yendluri, Daniel Berman, Junho Song, Jun S Kim, Samuel K Cho
{"title":"颈椎前路椎间盘切除术融合后椎笼对沉降的影响:一项回顾性研究。","authors":"Pierce J Ferriter, Suhas K Etigunta, Akiro H Duey, Christopher Gonzalez, Katrina Nietsch, Ashley M Rosenberg, Bashar Zaidat, Avanish Yendluri, Daniel Berman, Junho Song, Jun S Kim, Samuel K Cho","doi":"10.31616/asj.2025.0197","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study investigated the impact of cage material on subsidence and segmental lordosis following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), comparing polyetheretherketone (PEEK), titanium, and ceramic synthetic cages, as well as structural allografts.</p><p><strong>Overview of literature: </strong>Subsidence following ACDF surgery can negatively impact clinical outcomes. Although extensively studied, the relationship between cage type and subsidence remains unclear due to conflicting data and inconsistent control for confounders, underscoring the need for multivariable analysis to determine material-specific effects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective study of 120 patients (223 fusion levels) who underwent ACDF between 2016 and 2021. Spacer types included structural allografts, PEEK, titanium, and ceramic cages. Radiographic measurements of subsidence were obtained from immediate (≤8 weeks) and long-term (≥6 months) postoperative lateral cervical radiographs. Multivariable linear regression was used to assess the association between spacer type and subsidence, adjusting for patient demographics, surgical levels, smoking history, and osteopenia.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age of patients was 53.6±10.9 years and 41.7% were male; 47.5% had a smoking history and 20.8% had osteopenia. There were 38 one-level (31.7%), 61 two-level (50.8%), and 21 three-level fusions (17.5%). Spacer distribution included 62 structural allografts (51.7%), 27 PEEK (22.5%), 20 titanium (16.7%), and 11 ceramic (9.2%) cages. On multivariable analysis, PEEK cages were associated with significantly less anterior subsidence (β=-0.972, p <0.001) and posterior subsidence (β=-0.666, p=0.001) compared to allografts, and greater preservation of segmental lordosis (β=1.393, p=0.024). No significant differences in subsidence were found between titanium, ceramic, and allograft spacers.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PEEK cages showed reduced subsidence and better preservation of cervical lordosis compared to structural allografts, while titanium and ceramic cages did not differ significantly from structural allografts. These results suggest that PEEK cages may help minimize subsidence-related complications and improve outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":8555,"journal":{"name":"Asian Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of cage type on subsidence following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a retrospective study.\",\"authors\":\"Pierce J Ferriter, Suhas K Etigunta, Akiro H Duey, Christopher Gonzalez, Katrina Nietsch, Ashley M Rosenberg, Bashar Zaidat, Avanish Yendluri, Daniel Berman, Junho Song, Jun S Kim, Samuel K Cho\",\"doi\":\"10.31616/asj.2025.0197\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study investigated the impact of cage material on subsidence and segmental lordosis following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), comparing polyetheretherketone (PEEK), titanium, and ceramic synthetic cages, as well as structural allografts.</p><p><strong>Overview of literature: </strong>Subsidence following ACDF surgery can negatively impact clinical outcomes. Although extensively studied, the relationship between cage type and subsidence remains unclear due to conflicting data and inconsistent control for confounders, underscoring the need for multivariable analysis to determine material-specific effects.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective study of 120 patients (223 fusion levels) who underwent ACDF between 2016 and 2021. Spacer types included structural allografts, PEEK, titanium, and ceramic cages. Radiographic measurements of subsidence were obtained from immediate (≤8 weeks) and long-term (≥6 months) postoperative lateral cervical radiographs. Multivariable linear regression was used to assess the association between spacer type and subsidence, adjusting for patient demographics, surgical levels, smoking history, and osteopenia.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age of patients was 53.6±10.9 years and 41.7% were male; 47.5% had a smoking history and 20.8% had osteopenia. There were 38 one-level (31.7%), 61 two-level (50.8%), and 21 three-level fusions (17.5%). Spacer distribution included 62 structural allografts (51.7%), 27 PEEK (22.5%), 20 titanium (16.7%), and 11 ceramic (9.2%) cages. On multivariable analysis, PEEK cages were associated with significantly less anterior subsidence (β=-0.972, p <0.001) and posterior subsidence (β=-0.666, p=0.001) compared to allografts, and greater preservation of segmental lordosis (β=1.393, p=0.024). No significant differences in subsidence were found between titanium, ceramic, and allograft spacers.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>PEEK cages showed reduced subsidence and better preservation of cervical lordosis compared to structural allografts, while titanium and ceramic cages did not differ significantly from structural allografts. These results suggest that PEEK cages may help minimize subsidence-related complications and improve outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8555,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Spine Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Spine Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31616/asj.2025.0197\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31616/asj.2025.0197","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究设计:回顾性队列研究。目的:本研究比较聚醚醚酮(PEEK)、钛和陶瓷合成笼以及同种异体结构移植,探讨笼材料对前路颈椎椎间盘切除术融合(ACDF)后沉降和节段性前凸的影响。文献综述:ACDF手术后的沉降会对临床结果产生负面影响。尽管进行了广泛的研究,但由于数据冲突和混杂因素控制不一致,笼型与沉降之间的关系仍不清楚,因此需要进行多变量分析以确定材料的特定影响。方法:对2016年至2021年间接受ACDF的120例患者(223个融合水平)进行回顾性研究。垫片类型包括结构同种异体移植物,PEEK,钛和陶瓷笼。通过术后即刻(≤8周)和长期(≥6个月)颈椎侧位片测量沉降。采用多变量线性回归评估垫片类型与沉降之间的关系,调整患者人口统计学、手术水平、吸烟史和骨质减少。结果:患者平均年龄53.6±10.9岁,男性占41.7%;47.5%有吸烟史,20.8%有骨质减少。1节段融合38例(31.7%),2节段融合61例(50.8%),3节段融合21例(17.5%)。间隔器分布包括62个异体结构移植(51.7%),27个PEEK(22.5%), 20个钛(16.7%)和11个陶瓷(9.2%)笼。在多变量分析中,PEEK cage与结构异体移植物相比,可显著减少颈椎前凸的发生(β=-0.972, p)。结论:与结构异体移植物相比,PEEK cage可减少颈椎前凸的发生,并能更好地保存颈椎前凸,而钛和陶瓷cage与结构异体移植物相比无显著差异。这些结果表明PEEK保持器有助于减少与沉降相关的并发症并改善预后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Impact of cage type on subsidence following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a retrospective study.

Study design: Retrospective cohort study.

Purpose: This study investigated the impact of cage material on subsidence and segmental lordosis following anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF), comparing polyetheretherketone (PEEK), titanium, and ceramic synthetic cages, as well as structural allografts.

Overview of literature: Subsidence following ACDF surgery can negatively impact clinical outcomes. Although extensively studied, the relationship between cage type and subsidence remains unclear due to conflicting data and inconsistent control for confounders, underscoring the need for multivariable analysis to determine material-specific effects.

Methods: Retrospective study of 120 patients (223 fusion levels) who underwent ACDF between 2016 and 2021. Spacer types included structural allografts, PEEK, titanium, and ceramic cages. Radiographic measurements of subsidence were obtained from immediate (≤8 weeks) and long-term (≥6 months) postoperative lateral cervical radiographs. Multivariable linear regression was used to assess the association between spacer type and subsidence, adjusting for patient demographics, surgical levels, smoking history, and osteopenia.

Results: The mean age of patients was 53.6±10.9 years and 41.7% were male; 47.5% had a smoking history and 20.8% had osteopenia. There were 38 one-level (31.7%), 61 two-level (50.8%), and 21 three-level fusions (17.5%). Spacer distribution included 62 structural allografts (51.7%), 27 PEEK (22.5%), 20 titanium (16.7%), and 11 ceramic (9.2%) cages. On multivariable analysis, PEEK cages were associated with significantly less anterior subsidence (β=-0.972, p <0.001) and posterior subsidence (β=-0.666, p=0.001) compared to allografts, and greater preservation of segmental lordosis (β=1.393, p=0.024). No significant differences in subsidence were found between titanium, ceramic, and allograft spacers.

Conclusions: PEEK cages showed reduced subsidence and better preservation of cervical lordosis compared to structural allografts, while titanium and ceramic cages did not differ significantly from structural allografts. These results suggest that PEEK cages may help minimize subsidence-related complications and improve outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Asian Spine Journal
Asian Spine Journal ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.30%
发文量
108
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信