Search

To compare the safety and radiological effectiveness of lumbar interbody fusion with a 3D-printed porous titanium (3D-PPT) cage versus a polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cage for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease. This study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42023461511). We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases for related studies from inception to September 3, 2023. Review Manager 5.3 was used to conduct this meta-analysis. The reoperation rate, complication rate, fusion rate, and subsidence rate were assessed using relative risk and 95% confidence intervals. Ten articles reporting 9 studies comparing lumbar interbody fusion with 3D-PPT cages versus PEEK cages for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease were included. The subsidence rate at the 1-year follow-up in the 3D-PPT cage was significantly lower than that in the PEEK cage. The fusion rate in the 3D-PPT cage was significantly higher than that in the PEEK cage at the 6-month follow-up. No significant difference was identified between the 2 groups at the 12-month follow-up. No significant difference was identified between the 2 groups in terms of the complication rate and reoperation rate. There was a trend toward a lower complication rate and reoperation rate with the 3D-PPT cage. Compared with the PEEK cage, the 3D-PPT cage may be a safer implant. The 3D-PPT cage was associated with a higher fusion rate and lower subsidence rate. The 3D-PPT cage may accelerate the intervertebral fusion process, improve the quality of fusion and prevent the occurrence of subsidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To compare the effect of different Modic changes (MC) grades on the cage subsidence rate after spinal interbody fusion surgery. We comprehensively searched the PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases from inception to August 13, 2023, for relevant randomized controlled trials and prospective and retrospective cohort studies. Review Manager 5.3 and STATA13.0 were used to conduct this meta-analysis. The subsidence rate was assessed using relative risk and 95% confidence intervals. Six studies with a total of 716 segments were allocated to four groups according to the type of MC. The subsidence rate in the non-Modic changes (NMC) was significantly lower than that in the MC. The subsidence rate in the NMC was significantly lower than that in the MC in the subgroup of cages with extra instrumentation. No significant difference was identified between the 2 groups in the oblique lumbar interbody fusion subgroup. The subsidence rate in the NMC was significantly lower than that in the MC in the transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion subgroup. The subsidence rate in the NMC was significantly lower than that in the MC1 and MC2. We found no significant difference between NMC and MC3, MC1 and MC2, MC1 and MC3, or MC2 and MC3. MC may be associated with a higher cage subsidence rate. With the increase in MC grades, the incidence of subsidence decreased gradually, but it was always higher than that in the NMC. Oblique lumbar interbody fusion may be a better choice for the treatment of lumbar degenerative disease with MC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]