Niu Chi-Chien, Liao Jen-Chung, Chen Wen-Jer, Chen Lih-Huei
Department of Orthopedics Surgery, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
J Spinal Disord Tech. 2010 Jul;23(5):310-6. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0b013e3181af3a84.
A prospective study was performed in case with cervical spondylosis who underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with titanium or polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages.
To find out which fusion cage yielded better clinical and radiographic results.
Although use of autogenous iliac-bone grafts in ACDF for cervical disc diseases remain standard surgical procedure, donor site morbidity and graft collapse or breakage are concerns. Cage technology was developed to prevent these complications. However, there is no comparison regarding the efficacy between titanium and PEEK cage.
January 2005 to January 2006, 53 patients who had 1 and 2-levels ACDF with titanium or PEEK cages were evaluated. We measured the rate and amount of interspace collapse, segmental sagittal angulations, and the radiographic fusion success rate. Odom criteria were used to assess the clinical results.
The fusion rate was higher in the PEEK group (100% vs. 86.5%, P=0.0335). There was no significant difference between both groups in loss of cervical lordosis (3.2 + or - 2.4 vs. 2.8 + or - 3.4, P=0.166). The mean anterior interspace collapse (1.6 + or - 1.0 mm) in the titanium group was significantly higher than the collapse of the PEEK group (0.5 + or - 0.6 mm) (P<0.0001). The mean posterior interspace collapse was also higher in the titanium group (1.6 + or - 0.9 mm vs. 0.5 + or - 0.5 mm, P<0.0001). An interspace collapse of 3 mm or greater was observed in 16.2% of the patients in the titanium group, compared with zero patients in the PEEK group (P<0.0001). The PEEK group achieved an 80% rate of successful clinical outcomes, compared with 75% in the titanium group (P=0.6642).
The PEEK cage is superior to the titanium cage in maintaining cervical interspace height and radiographic fusion after 1 and 2-levels anterior cervical decompression procedures.
对接受钛或聚醚醚酮(PEEK)椎间融合器前路颈椎间盘切除融合术(ACDF)的颈椎病患者进行了一项前瞻性研究。
了解哪种融合器能产生更好的临床和影像学效果。
尽管在ACDF治疗颈椎间盘疾病中使用自体髂骨移植仍是标准手术方法,但供区并发症以及植骨塌陷或断裂令人担忧。椎间融合器技术的发展是为了预防这些并发症。然而,钛和PEEK椎间融合器的疗效尚无比较。
2005年1月至2006年1月,对53例行单节段或双节段ACDF并使用钛或PEEK椎间融合器的患者进行评估。我们测量了椎间隙塌陷的发生率和程度、节段矢状角以及影像学融合成功率。采用奥多姆标准评估临床结果。
PEEK组的融合率更高(100%对86.5%,P = 0.0335)。两组在颈椎前凸丢失方面无显著差异(3.2±2.4对2.8±3.4,P = 0.166)。钛组的平均椎间隙前侧塌陷(1.6±1.0mm)显著高于PEEK组(0.5±0.6mm)(P<0.0001)。钛组的平均椎间隙后侧塌陷也更高(1.6±0.9mm对0.5±0.5mm,P<0.0001)。钛组16.2%的患者观察到椎间隙塌陷3mm或更大,而PEEK组为零(P<0.0001)。PEEK组的临床成功率为80%,钛组为75%(P = 0.6642)。
在单节段和双节段前路颈椎减压术后,PEEK椎间融合器在维持颈椎椎间隙高度和影像学融合方面优于钛椎间融合器。