Speed and quality of interbody fusion in porous bioceramic Al2O3 and polyetheretherketone cages for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a comparative study
The result's identifiers
Result code in IS VaVaI
<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00179906%3A_____%2F23%3A10464731" target="_blank" >RIV/00179906:_____/23:10464731 - isvavai.cz</a>
Alternative codes found
RIV/00216208:11150/23:10464731
Result on the web
<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=uhfwMkqWzH" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=uhfwMkqWzH</a>
DOI - Digital Object Identifier
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-023-03625-8" target="_blank" >10.1186/s13018-023-03625-8</a>
Alternative languages
Result language
angličtina
Original language name
Speed and quality of interbody fusion in porous bioceramic Al2O3 and polyetheretherketone cages for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a comparative study
Original language description
BackgroundThe objective of this prospective randomized monocentric study is to compare the speed and quality of interbody fusion of implanted porous Al2O3 (aluminium oxide) cages with PEEK (polyetheretherketone) cages in ACDF (anterior cervical discectomy and fusion).Materials and methodsA total of 111 patients were enrolled in the study, which was carried out between 2015 and 2021. The 18-month follow-up (FU) was completed in 68 patients with an Al2O3 cage and 35 patients with a PEEK cage in one-level ACDF. Initially, the first evidence (initialization) of fusion was evaluated on computed tomography. Subsequently, interbody fusion was evaluated according to the fusion quality scale, fusion rate and incidence of subsidence.ResultsSigns of incipient fusion at 3 months were detected in 22% of cases with the Al2O3 cage and 37.1% with the PEEK cage. At 12-month FU, the fusion rate was 88.2% for Al2O3 and 97.1% for PEEK cages, and at the final FU at 18 months, 92.6% and 100%, respectively. The incidence of subsidence was observed to be 11.8% and 22.9% of cases with Al2O3 and PEEK cages, respectively.ConclusionsPorous Al2O3 cages demonstrated a lower speed and quality of fusion in comparison with PEEK cages. However, the fusion rate of Al2O3 cages was within the range of published results for various cages. The incidence of subsidence of Al2O3 cages was lower compared to published results. We consider the porous Al2O3 cage as safe for a stand-alone disc replacement in ACDF.
Czech name
—
Czech description
—
Classification
Type
J<sub>imp</sub> - Article in a specialist periodical, which is included in the Web of Science database
CEP classification
—
OECD FORD branch
30103 - Neurosciences (including psychophysiology)
Result continuities
Project
—
Continuities
I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace
Others
Publication year
2023
Confidentiality
S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů
Data specific for result type
Name of the periodical
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
ISSN
1749-799X
e-ISSN
—
Volume of the periodical
18
Issue of the periodical within the volume
1
Country of publishing house
GB - UNITED KINGDOM
Number of pages
8
Pages from-to
165
UT code for WoS article
000943497100002
EID of the result in the Scopus database
2-s2.0-85149550252