Comparison of the PEEK Cage and an Autologous Cage Made from the Lumbar Spinous Process and Laminae in Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion

Overview

Journal BMC Musculoskelet Disord

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialties Orthopedics
Physiology

Date 2016 Sep 1

PMID 27577978

Citations 12

Authors

Bin Lin

Hui Yu

Zhida Chen

Zhuanzhi Huang

Wenbin Zhang

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: A prospective cohort study was performed to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes following posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in patients treated with a PEEK cage compared to those treated with an autologous cage using the lumbar spinous process and laminae (ACSP).

Methods: Sixty-nine consecutive patients with lumbar degenerative disc disease were randomly assigned to either a PEEK cage (group A, n = 34) or an ACSP (group B, n = 35). Monosegmental PLIF was performed in all patients. Mean lumbar lordosis, mean disc height, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, functional outcomes, fusion rates and complication rates were recorded and compared. The patients were followed postoperatively for a minimum of 2 years.

Results: Successful radiographic fusion was documented in all patients. No flexion-extension hypermobility or pedicle screw loosening or breakage occurred during the follow-up period. No significant difference existed between the 2 groups when comparing the mean lumbar lordosis, mean disc height, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, functional outcomes, fusion rates or complication rates. Overall satisfactory results were achieved in both groups.

Conclusions: The results suggest that the ACSP appears to be equally as safe and effective as the PEEK cage.

Trial Registration: ISRCTN25558534 . Retrospectively registered 16/02/2016.

Citing Articles

Comparing Lumbar Spine Cages and Bone Grafts in Spinal Arthrodesis: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcomes.

Almohammadi Y, Albduljabbar A, Almosa A, Alalwani Y, Abdulshakur A, Alzuwayhiri R Cureus. 2025; 17(1):e77017.

PMID: 39912040 PMC: 11798537. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.77017.

Flexible support material maintains disc height and supports the formation of hydrated tissue engineered intervertebral discs in vivo.

Fidai A, Kim B, Lintz M, Kirnaz S, Gadjradj P, Boadi B JOR Spine. 2024; 7(3):e1363.

PMID: 39104832 PMC: 11299905. DOI: 10.1002/jsp2.1363.

Biomechanical comparison of polyetheretherketone rods and titanium alloy rods in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a finite element analysis.

Li J, Cao S, Zhao B BMC Surg. 2024; 24(1):169.

PMID: 38811965 PMC: 11134660. DOI: 10.1186/s12893-024-02462-8.

Comparison of structural occipital and iliac bone grafts for instrumented atlantoaxial fusions in pediatric patients: Radiologic research and clinical outcomes.

Liang Z, Zhang Y, Liu H, Zhang Q, Song J, Shao J Front Surg. 2023; 10:1059544.

PMID: 37025272 PMC: 10070866. DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2023.1059544.

Complications in Spinal Fusion Surgery: A Systematic Review of Clinically Used Cages.

Veronesi F, Sartori M, Griffoni C, Valacco M, Tedesco G, Davassi P J Clin Med. 2022; 11(21).

PMID: 36362508 PMC: 9659217. DOI: 10.3390/jcm11216279.

References

Gupta M . Degenerative scoliosis. Options for surgical management. Orthop Clin North Am. 2003; 34(2):269-79. DOI: 10.1016/s0030-5898(03)00029-4. View

Abdul Q, Qayum M, Saradhi M, Panigrahi M, Sreedhar V . Clinico-radiological profile of indirect neural decompression using cage or auto graft as interbody construct in posterior lumbar interbody fusion in spondylolisthesis: Which is better?. J Craniovertebr Junction Spine. 2011; 2(1):12-6. PMC: 3190424. DOI: 10.4103/0974-8237.85308. View

Glazer P, Colliou O, Klisch S, Bradfore D, Bueff H, Lotz J . Biomechanical analysis of multilevel fixation methods in the lumbar spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1997; 22(2):171-82. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199701150-00008. View

Wetzel F, Brustein M, Phillips F, Trott S . Hardware failure in an unconstrained lumbar pedicle screw system. A 2-year follow-up study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999; 24(11):1138-43. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199906010-00014. View

Kirkaldy-Willis W, Paine K, Cauchoix J, McIvor G . Lumbar spinal stenosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1974; (99):30-50. DOI: 10.1097/00003086-197403000-00004. View

Jockisch K, Brown S, Bauer T, Merritt K . Biological response to chopped-carbon-fiber-reinforced peek. J Biomed Mater Res. 1992; 26(2):133-46. DOI: 10.1002/jbm.820260202. View

Lazennec J, Madi A, Rousseau M, Roger B, Saillant G . Evaluation of the 96/4 PLDLLA polymer resorbable lumbar interbody cage in a long term animal model. Eur Spine J. 2006; 15(10):1545-53. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-006-0145-5. View

Brantigan J, Steffee A, Lewis M, Quinn L, Persenaire J . Lumbar interbody fusion using the Brantigan I/F cage for posterior lumbar interbody fusion and the variable pedicle screw placement system: two-year results from a Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption clinical trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000; 25(11):1437-46. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200006010-00017. View

Yu C, Wang C, Chen P . Instrumented posterior lumbar interbody fusion in adult spondylolisthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008; 466(12):3034-43. PMC: 2628248. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-008-0511-1. View

10.

Glassman S, Bridwell K, Dimar J, Horton W, Berven S, Schwab F . The impact of positive sagittal balance in adult spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005; 30(18):2024-9. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000179086.30449.96. View

11.

Flouzat-Lachaniette C, Ghazanfari A, Bouthors C, Poignard A, Hernigou P, Allain J . Bone union rate with recombinant human bone morphogenic protein-2 versus autologous iliac bone in PEEK cages for anterior lumbar interbody fusion. Int Orthop. 2014; 38(9):2001-7. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-014-2301-6. View

12.

Du Bois M, Szpalski M, Donceel P . Patients at risk for long-term sick leave because of low back pain. Spine J. 2008; 9(5):350-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2008.07.003. View

13.

Closkey R, Parsons J, Lee C, Blacksin M, Zimmerman M . Mechanics of interbody spinal fusion. Analysis of critical bone graft area. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1993; 18(8):1011-5. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199306150-00010. View

14.

Rousseau M, Lazennec J, Saillant G . Circumferential arthrodesis using PEEK cages at the lumbar spine. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2007; 20(4):278-81. DOI: 10.1097/01.bsd.0000211284.14143.63. View

15.

Molinari R, Sloboda J, Johnstone F . Are 2 cages needed with instrumented PLIF? A comparison of 1 versus 2 interbody cages in a military population. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2003; 32(7):337-43; discussion 343. View

16.

Tsutsumimoto T, Shimogata M, Ohta H, Misawa H . Mini-open versus conventional open posterior lumbar interbody fusion for the treatment of lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: comparison of paraspinal muscle damage and slip reduction. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009; 34(18):1923-8. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181a9d28e. View

17.

Heary R, Schlenk R, Sacchieri T, Barone D, Brotea C . Persistent iliac crest donor site pain: independent outcome assessment. Neurosurgery. 2002; 50(3):510-6; discussion 516-7. DOI: 10.1097/00006123-200203000-00015. View

18.

Enker P, Steffee A . Interbody fusion and instrumentation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994; (300):90-101. View

19.

SUK S, Lee C, Kim W, Lee J, Cho K, Kim H . Adding posterior lumbar interbody fusion to pedicle screw fixation and posterolateral fusion after decompression in spondylolytic spondylolisthesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1997; 22(2):210-9; discussion 219-20. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199701150-00016. View

20.

Ploumis A, Albert T, Brown Z, Mehbod A, Transfeldt E . Healos graft carrier with bone marrow aspirate instead of allograft as adjunct to local autograft for posterolateral fusion in degenerative lumbar scoliosis: a minimum 2-year follow-up study. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010; 13(2):211-5. DOI: 10.3171/2010.3.SPINE09603. View