Clinical and radiological results comparison of allograft and polyetheretherketone cage for one to two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A CONSORT-compliant article

The fusion rates at different times of cortical iliac crest autograft or allograft compared with cages after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The cortical iliac crest autograft (CICA)/structural allograft (SA) has still been recognized as the gold standard for the ACDF technique for its high degree of histocompatibility and osteoinduction ability though the flourishing and evolving cage development. However, there was no further indication for using CICA/SA in ACDF based on basic information of inpatients. Our operative experience implied that applying CICA/SA has an advantage on faster fusion but not the long-term fusion rate. Therefore, our study aimed to compare the fusion rates between CICA and cage, between SA and cage, and between CICA/CA and cage.

METHODS

Based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), a comprehensive literature search of electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science was conducted to identify these clinical trials that investigated the postoperative 3, 6, 12 and 24 months fusion rates of CICA/structural SA versus cage. Assessment of risk of bias, data extraction and statistical analysis were then carried out by two independent authors with the resolve-by-consensus method. The primary outcome was fusion rate at 3, 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. The secondary outcomes were also meta-analyzed such as hardware complications, operative duration and hospitalization time. Our meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (Identifier: CRD42022345247).

RESULT

A total of 3451 segments (2398 patients) derived from 34 studies were included after the screening of 3366 articles. The segmental fusion rates of CICA were higher than cages at 3 (P = 0.184, I2 = 40.9%) and 6 (P = 0.147, I2 = 38.8%) months postoperatively, but not 12 (P = 0.988, I2 = 0.0%) and 24 (P = 0.055, I2 = 65.6%) months postoperatively. And there was no significant difference in segmental fusion rates between SA and cage at none of 3 (P = 0.047, I2 = 62.2%), 6 (P = 0.179, I2 = 41.9%) and 12 (P = 0.049, I2 = 58.0%) months after operations. As for secondary outcomes, the CICA was inferior to cages in terms of hardware complications, operative time, blood loss, hospitalization time, interbody height, disk height and Odom rating. The hardware complication of using SA was significantly higher than the cage, but not the hospitalization time, disk height, NDI and Odom rating.

CONCLUSION

Applying CICA has an advantage on faster fusion than using a cage but not the long-term fusion rate in ACDF. Future high-quality RCTs regarding the hardware complications between CICA and cage in younger patients are warranted for the deduced indication.

Comparison of Different Osteobiologics in Terms of Imaging Modalities and Time Frames for Fusion Assessment in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Systematic Review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

The study's primary objective was to determine how osteobiologic choice affects fusion rates in patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). The study's secondary objectives were to 1) determine the optimal timing of fusion assessment following ACDF and 2) determine if osteobiologic type affects the timing and optimal modality of fusion assessment.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE was conducted for literature published from 2000 through October 2020 comparing anterior fusion in the cervical spine with various osteobiologics. Both comparative studies and case series of ≥10 patients were included.

RESULTS

A total of 74 studies met the inclusion criteria. Seventeen studies evaluated the efficacy of autograft on fusion outcomes, and 23 studies assessed the efficacy of allograft on fusion outcomes. 3 studies evaluated the efficacy of demineralized bone matrix, and seven assessed the efficacy of rhBMP-2 on fusion outcomes. Other limited studies evaluated the efficacy of ceramics and bioactive glasses on fusion outcomes, and 4 assessed the efficacy of stem cell products. Most studies utilized dynamic radiographs for the assessment of fusion. Overall, there was a general lack of supportive data to determine the optimal timing of fusion assessment meaningfully or if osteobiologic type influenced fusion timing.

CONCLUSIONS

Achieving fusion following ACDF appears to remain an intricate interplay between host biology and various surgical factors, including the selection of osteobiologics. While alternative osteobiologics to autograft exist and may produce acceptable fusion rates, limitations in study methodology prevent any definitive conclusions from existing literature.

Complications of the Use Allograft in 1- or 2-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: A Systematic Review

Study Design: Systematic literature reviewObjective: To critically analyze the literature and describe the complications associated with the use of allograft in 1- or 2- level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF)Methods: A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases was conducted for literature published between January 2000 and August 2020 reporting complications associated with the use of allograft in 1- or 2- level ACDF.Results: From 584 potentially relevant citations, 21 met the inclusion criteria (4 randomized controlled trials (RCT), 4 prospective, and 13 retrospective studies). The patient number varied between 26 and 463 in comparative studies (RCT and non-RCT) and between 29 and 345 in non-comparative studies. Fusion rate was reported in 14 studies and ranged between 68.5-100%. The most frequently reported complication was post-operative dysphagia or dysphonia, with incidences ranging between .5% and 14.4%. Revision surgery was the second most reported complication (14 studies) and ranged between 0% and 10.3%. Wound-related complications were reported in 6 studies and ranged between 0% and 22.8%.Conclusion: The overall reporting of complications was low with very few comparative studies. Reported complications with allografts are within the range of other osteobiologics and autografts and in most cases may not attributable to the use of osteobiologics and may be complications of the procedure itself. Comparative studies with a more robust methodology analyzing complications with allograft and other osteobiologics are needed to inform current practice with strong recommendations.

The Outcomes of Revision Anterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion Using a Stand-Alone Implant Versus Traditional Interbody Polyetheretherketone Cage, Titanium Plate, and Screw Instrumentation

INTRODUCTION

Anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF) is the standard surgical procedure for cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy, although ACDF includes risks of adjacent segment disease (ASD) and subsequent revision procedures. Various interbody cage, plate, and screw options can be utilized. Stand-alone devices were designed to overcome undesired complications of hardware prominence and associated dysphagia, soft tissue violation, and adjacent level encroachment. Implants include biomechanical structural support (cage) composed of various materials (polyetheretherketone (PEEK)/titanium) and integral fixation (screws/blades). The purpose was to compare intraoperative, short- and long-term outcomes of revision ACDF using a stand-alone implant (ACDF-ZP group) versus traditional interbody PEEK cage, titanium plate, and screw instrumentation (ACDF-CP group).

METHODS

This was a retrospective, cohort study reviewing charts of patients who underwent revision ACDF. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of postoperative dysphagia. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative, short-term, and long-term outcomes and complications.

RESULTS

Sixty-one patients were included (ACDF-ZP group = 50; ACDF-CP group = 11). In-hospital incidence of dysphagia was significantly less in the ACDF-CP group (P = 0.041). Thrity-one (62.0%) of the ACDF-ZP group reported dysphagia postoperatively, half resolved by 6 weeks, and two persisted for more than 6 months. Five (45.5%) of the ACDF-CP group reported dysphagia with most resolving within 6 weeks. There were no statistically significant differences between groups in short- or long-term complications, dysphonia, or reoperation rates. No statistical significance was seen in blood loss, operative time, hospital stay, local and global alignment, or cage subsidence.

CONCLUSION

Rates of dysphagia were comparable between groups at short and long-term follow-up, despite a greater incidence of postoperative dysphagia in the ACDF-ZP group. All complications and occurrences of cage subsidence were observed in the ACDF-ZP group, which may be attributed to the larger sample size. Given these findings, zero-profile stand-alone implants and traditional interbody PEEK cage, titanium plate, and screw instrumentation appear to be both safe and effective options for revision ACDF.

Anterior percutaneous full-endoscopic transcorporeal decompression of the spinal cord via one vertebra with two bony channels for adjacent two-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a technical note

BACKGROUND

The current treatments for adjacent two-segment cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) include two-segment anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and single-segment anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF). Long-term follow-up has demonstrated that both procedures have complications such as reduced cervical mobility, accelerated degeneration of adjacent segments and loosening of internal fixation screws. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of anterior percutaneous full-endoscopic transcorporeal decompression of the spinal cord (APFETDSC) via one vertebra with two bony channels for the treatment of adjacent two-segment CSM and to present our surgical experience.

METHODS

Anterior percutaneous full-endoscopic transcorporeal decompression of the spinal cord (APFETDSC) via one vertebra with two bony channels was performed for 12 patients with adjacent two-segment CSM with follow-up care for at least 12 months. The Visual analog scale (VAS) and the Japanese Orthopedic Association Score (JOA) were recorded, and modified Macnab criteria were used to evaluate the treatment excellence rate. Radiological examinations, including X-ray, computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), were used to evaluate spinal cord decompression, intervertebral stability and healing of the bony channel.

RESULTS

All 12 patients completed the operation successfully. No postoperative complications, such as dysphagia, Horner's syndrome, or laryngeal recurrent nerve palsy, were found. The postoperative VAS and JOA scores were significantly improved compared with those before surgery(P < 0.001). According to the modified Macnab criteria, the clinical outcome was excellent in 8 cases, good in 3 cases and fine in 1 case at the final follow-up and the excellent and good rate was 91.7%. Postoperative and follow-up imaging showed significant spinal cord decompression, well-healed bony channels and no cervical instability.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is the first report of anterior percutaneous full-endoscopic transcorporeal decompression of the spinal cord via one vertebra with two bony channels. This procedure has the advantages of less trauma, faster recovery, fewer complications and no need to implant internal fixators. This is a minimally invasive, feasible and safe surgical procedure for patients with adjacent two-segment CSM.

Effects of Structural Allograft versus Polyetheretherketone Cage in Patients Undergoing Spinal Fusion Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Inter body spacers have been widely used in patients undergoing spinal fusion surgery; however, it is not clear whether one implant shows superior clinical outcomes compared with the other. This systematic review and meta-analysis comprehensively evaluated the radiologic outcomes and patient-reported outcomes of structural allograft versus polyetheretherketone (PEEK) implants in patients undergoing spinal fusion surgery.

METHODS

Extensive literature searches were conducted on online databases, including MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Cochrane Library, until January 2023. The present study adheres to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias tool were used to assess the quality of the included studies.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies, encompassing 8020 patients, met the eligibility criteria. The results indicate that structural allografts show a higher fusion rate compared with PEEK implants (odds ratio [OR], 1.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-3.37; P ＝0.03; I2 = 71%). In addition, the structural allograft group also had a lower pseudarthrosis rate (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.20-0.80; P = 0.009; I2 = 75%) and reoperation rate (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.26-0.81; P = 0.007; I2 = 38%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic review and meta-analysis show that structural allograft has a higher fusion rate compared with PEEK implants in patients undergoing spinal fusion surgery. In addition, structural allograft has a lower pseudarthrosis rate and reoperation rate.

A Five-Year Cost-Utility Analysis Comparing Synthetic Cage Versus Allograft Use in Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Surgery for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cost-utility analysis.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a cost-analysis comparing synthetic cage (SC) versus allograft (Allo) over a five-year time horizon.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

SC and Allo are two commonly used interbody choices for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) surgery. Previous analyses comparative analyses have reached mixed conclusions regarding their cost-effectiveness, yet recent estimates provide high-quality evidence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A decision-analysis model comparing the use of Allo versus SC was developed for a hypothetical 60-year-old patient with cervical spondylotic myelopathy undergoing single-level ACDF surgery. A comprehensive literature review was performed to estimate probabilities, costs (2020 USD) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained over a five-year period. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis using a Monte Carlo simulation of 1000 patients was carried out to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and net monetary benefits. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis was performed to estimate the contribution of individual parameters to uncertainty in the model.

RESULTS

The use of Allo was favored in 81.6% of the iterations at a societal willing-to-pay threshold of 50,000 USD/QALY. Allo dominated (higher net QALYs and lower net costs) in 67.8% of the iterations. The incremental net monetary benefits in the Allo group was 2650 USD at a willing-to-pay threshold of 50,000 USD/QALY. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis revealed that the cost of the index surgery was the only factor which significantly contributed to uncertainty.

CONCLUSION

Cost-utility analysis suggests that Allo maybe a more cost-effective option compared with SCs in adult patients undergoing ACDF for cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Titanium versus polyetheretherketone versus structural allograft in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: A systematic review

Introduction

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a common procedure to address cervical spine pathology. The most common grafts used are titanium, polyetheretherketone (PEEK), or structural allograft. Comparison of fusion rate is difficult due to non-standardized methods of assessment. We stratified studies by method of fusion assessment and performed a systematic review of fusion rates for titanium, PEEK, and allograft.

Research question

Which of the common implants used in ACDF has the highest reported rate of fusion?

Materials and methods

An experienced librarian performed a five-database systematic search for published articles between 01/01/1990 and 08/07/2021. Studies performed in adults with at least 1 year of radiographic follow up were included. The primary outcome was the rate of fusion. Fusion criteria were stratified into 6 classes based upon best practices.

Results

34 studies met inclusion criteria. 10 studies involving 924 patients with 1094 cervical levels, used tier 1 fusion criteria and 6 studies (309 patients and 367 levels) used tier 2 fusion criteria. Forty seven percent of the studies used class 3–6 fusion criteria and were not included in the analysis. Fusion rates did differ between titanium (avg. 87.3%, range 84%–100%), PEEK (avg. 92.8%, range 62%–100%), and structural allograft (avg. 94.67%, range 82%–100%).

Discussion and conclusion

After stratifying studies by fusion criteria, significant heterogeneity in study design and fusion assessment prohibited the performance of a meta-analysis. Fusion rate did not differ by graft type. Important surgical goals aside from fusion rate, such as degree of deformity correction, could not be assessed. Future studies with standardized high-quality methods of assessing fusion, are required.

•

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is a common procedure to address cervical spine pathology.

•

The optimal graft type of promote fusion is unknown. The methods for assessing fusion are not standardized.

•

This is a systematic review comparing fusion rates for ACDF grafts after first stratified by method of fusion assessment.

•

Significant heterogeneity in study design and fusion assessment prohibited the performance of a meta-analysis; Fusion rate did not differ by graft type.

•

Future studies with standardized high-quality methods of assessing fusion, are required.

Biomaterials for Interbody Fusion in Bone Tissue Engineering

In recent years, interbody fusion cages have played an important role in interbody fusion surgery for treating diseases like disc protrusion and spondylolisthesis. However, traditional cages cannot achieve satisfactory results due to their unreasonable design, poor material biocompatibility, and induced osteogenesis ability, limiting their application. There are currently 3 ways to improve the fusion effect, as follows. First, the interbody fusion cage is designed to facilitate bone ingrowth through the preliminary design. Second, choose interbody fusion cages made of different materials to meet the variable needs of interbody fusion. Finally, complete post-processing steps, such as coating the designed cage, to achieve a suitable osseointegration microstructure, and add other bioactive materials to achieve the most suitable biological microenvironment of bone tissue and improve the fusion effect. The focus of this review is on the design methods of interbody fusion cages, a comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of various materials, the influence of post-processing techniques and additional materials on interbody fusion, and the prospects for the future development of interbody fusion cages.

Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Using Zero-P System for Treatment of Cervical Spondylosis: A Meta-Analysis

Objective

The current study aimed to explore the efficacy of Zero profile intervertebral fusion system (Zero-P) and traditional anterior plate cage system (PC) in the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). Further, the present study evaluated effects of the treatments on medical security, height of intervertebral disc, adjacent-level ossification development (ALOD), and adjacent segmentation disease (ASD) through a systematic retrospective analysis.

Methods

Studies on Zero-P system and traditional anterior plate cage system for ACDF in the treatment of CSM were searched in PubMed, Web of Science, Ovid, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Two independent researchers screened articles, extracted data, and evaluated the quality of the articles based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the current study. RevMan5.3 software was used for meta-analysis following the guidelines of Cochrane collaboration network. Cervical curvature, interbody fusion rate, preoperative and postoperative disc height index (DHI), fusion cage sinking rate, postoperative dysphagia, ASD, ALOD, and loosening of screw were compared between the two groups.

Results

A total of 17 literatures were included in the present study, including 6 randomized controlled trials and 11 observational studies. The studies comprised a total of 1204 patients with CSM, including 605 patients in the Zero-P system group (Zero-P group) and 599 patients in the traditional animal plate cage group (PC group). Results of this meta-analysis showed that postoperative dysphagia [OR = 0.40, CI (0.28, 95% 0.58), P < 0.00001], ALOD [OR = 0.09, CI (0.02, 95% 0.39), P = 0.001], ASD [OR = 0.42, CI (0.20, 95% 0.86), P = 0.02], and screw loosening [OR = 0.20, CI (0.08, 95% 0.52), P = 0.0009] of the Zero-P group were significantly lower compared with the PC group. On the other hand, preoperative cervical curvature [WMD = −0.23, CI (−1.38, 95% 0.92), P = 0.69], postoperative cervical curvature [WMD = −0.38, CI (−1.77, 95% 1.01), P = 0.59], cage sinking rate [OR = 1.41, CI [0.52, 95% 3.82], P = 0.50], intervertebral fusion rate [OR = 0.76, CI (0.27, 95% 2.48), P = 0.38], preoperative DHI [WMD = −0.04, CI (−0.14, 95% 0.22), P = 0.65], and postoperative DHI [WMD = 0.06, CI (−0.22, 95% 0.34), P = 0.675] were not significantly different between the two groups.

Conclusion

It was evident that the Zero-P system used in ACDF is superior compared with the traditional anterior plate cage system in postoperative dysphagia, avoiding ALOD, ASD, and screw loosening.

Is the fusion order of the cranial and caudal levels different in two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical spondylopathy? A retrospective study

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the fusion order between the cranial and caudal levels in two-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with a zero-profile device in the treatment of cervical spondylopathy. Fusion is the standard used to judge the success of ACDF. However, the fusion order in two-level ACDF remains uncertain. The mechanical environment of different levels is different, which may affect the fusion rate or fusion order.

METHODS

From 2014 to January 2019, data of consecutive patients with two-level cervical disk degenerative disease who underwent ACDF were retrospectively reviewed. Radiological assessments were based on the range of motion of the fusion level, segment slope, and disk height, and complications were assessed. Data were analyzed using the paired t, Mann-Whitney U, χ2, Fisher exact, and rank-sum tests and logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 118 patients were ultimately enrolled for analysis in the study. The respective fusion rates of the cranial and caudal levels were 26.27% and 10.17% (p < 0.05) at 3 months, 58.47% and 42.37% (p < 0.05) at 6 months, 86.44% and 82.20% (1 0.05) at 1 year, and 92.37% and 89.83% (p > 0.05) at the last follow-up. Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that the preoperative segmental slope and cranial level were independent risk factors for non-fusion. The adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) and subsidence rates were comparable between the two levels.

CONCLUSION

The caudal level had a slower fusion process than the cranial level. A higher preoperative segment slope was a risk factor for fusion. However, the subsidence and ASD rate were comparable between the caudal and cranial levels in the two-level ACDF.

Pseudarthrosis rate following anterior cervical discectomy with fusion using an allograft cellular bone matrix: a multi-institutional analysis

OBJECTIVE

The use of osteobiologics, engineered materials designed to promote bone healing by enhancing bone growth, is becoming increasingly common for spinal fusion procedures, but the efficacy of some of these products is unclear. The authors performed a retrospective, multi-institutional study to investigate the clinical and radiographic characteristics of patients undergoing single-level anterior cervical discectomy with fusion performed using the osteobiologic agent Osteocel, an allograft mesenchymal stem cell matrix.

METHODS

The medical records across 3 medical centers and 12 spine surgeons were retrospectively queried for patients undergoing single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with the use of Osteocel. Pseudarthrosis was determined based on CT or radiographic imaging of the cervical spine. Patients were determined to have radiographic pseudarthrosis if they met any of the following criteria: 1) lack of bridging bone on CT obtained > 300 days postoperatively, 2) evidence of instrumentation failure, or 3) motion across the index level as seen on flexion-extension cervical spine radiographs. Univariate and multivariate analyses were then performed to identify independent preoperative or perioperative predictors of pseudarthrosis in this population.

RESULTS

A total of 326 patients met the inclusion criteria; 43 (13.2%) patients met criteria for pseudarthrosis, of whom 15 (34.9%) underwent revision surgery. There were no significant differences between patients with and those without pseudarthrosis, respectively, for patient age (54.1 vs 53.8 years), sex (34.9% vs 47.4% male), race, prior cervical spine surgery (37.2% vs 33.6%), tobacco abuse (16.3% vs 14.5%), chronic kidney disease (2.3% vs 2.8%), and diabetes (18.6% vs 14.5%) (p > 0.05). Presence of osteopenia or osteoporosis (16.3% vs 3.5%) was associated with pseudarthrosis (p < 0.001). Implant type was also significantly associated with pseudarthrosis, with a 16.4% rate of pseudarthrosis for patients with polyetherethereketone (PEEK) implants versus 8.4% for patients with allograft implants (p = 0.04). Average lengths of follow-up were 27.6 and 23.8 months for patients with and those without pseudarthrosis, respectively. Multivariate analysis demonstrated osteopenia or osteoporosis (OR 4.97, 95% CI 1.51-16.4, p < 0.01) and usage of PEEK implant (OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.04-4.83, p = 0.04) as independent predictors of pseudarthrosis.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients who underwent single-level ACDF, rates of pseudarthrosis associated with the use of the osteobiologic agent Osteocel are higher than the literature-reported rates associated with the use of alternative osteobiologics. This is especially true when Osteocel is combined with a PEEK implant.

Titanium-interlayer mediated hydroxyapatite coating on polyetheretherketone: a prospective study in patients with single-level cervical degenerative disc disease

BACKGROUND

Currently, there are limited reports regarding investigation of the biological properties of polyetheretherketone (PEEK) coated with titanium (Ti) and hydroxyapatite (HA) in human. The objective of this study is to evaluate the in vivo response of the PEEK cages coated with Ti and HA versus uncoated PEEK cages after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in patients with single-level cervical degenerative disc disease (CDDD).

METHODS

Twenty-four patients with PEEK cages coated with Ti and HA (PEEK/Ti/HA group) were matched one-to-one with patients with uncoated PEEK cages (PEEK group) based on age, gender, and operative segment. All patients had been followed up for more than 2 years. Radiological assessments included intervertebral height (IH), C2-7 angle (C2-7a), segmental alignment (SA), and fusion rate. Clinical parameters included Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores.

RESULTS

There was no statistical difference in SA, IH, and C2-7a between the two groups before and after surgery and all these parameters were restored postoperatively. The fusion rate of PEEK/Ti/HA group was significantly higher than PEEK group at 3-month post-operation (87.5% vs. 62.5%). At the last follow-up, the fusion rate of the both groups achieved 100%. The VAS and JOA scores were comparable between two groups and improved postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with single-level ACDF, PEEK cage coated with Ti and HA provided a higher fusion rate than uncoated PEEK cage at 3-month post-operation, while both two cages could achieve solid osseous fusion at the last follow up. Compared with the uncoated PEEK cage, PEEK/Ti/HA cage yielded similar favorable segmental and overall cervical lordosis, IH, and clinical outcomes after the surgery.

Synthetic Cages Associated With Increased Rates of Revision Surgery and Higher Costs Compared to Allograft in ACDF in the Nonelderly Patient

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare all-cause reoperation rates and costs in nonelderly patients treated with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with structural allograft versus synthetic cages for degenerative pathology.

Methods

We queried a private claims database to identify adult patients (≤ 65 years) who underwent single-level ACDF in a hospital setting using either structural allograft or a synthetic cage (polyetheretherketone, metal, or hybrid device), from 2010 to 2016. The rate of all-cause reoperations at 2 years were compared between the 2 groups. Index hospitalization costs and 90-day complication rates were also compared. Significance was set at p < 0.05.

Results

A total of 26,754 patients were included in the study. 11,514 patients (43%) underwent ACDF with structural allograft and 15,240 (57%) underwent ACDF with a synthetic cage. The patients in the allograft group were younger and more likely to be male. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups with respect to 90-day complications including: wound dehiscence, dysphagia, dysphonia, and hematoma/seroma. In the 2-year postoperative period, the synthetic cage group had a significantly higher rate of allcause reoperation compared to the allograft group (9.1% vs. 8.0%, p = 0.002). Index hospitalization costs were significantly higher in the synthetic cage group compared to those in the allograft group ($23,475 vs. $20,836, p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Structural allograft is associated with lower all-cause reoperation rates and lower index costs in nonelderly patients undergoing ACDF surgery for degenerative pathology. It is important to understand this data as we transition toward value-based care.