Which interbody device minimized nonunion, subsidence, and reoperation after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion? A systematic review and meta-analysis comparing allograft versus polyetheretherketone cage.

OBJECTIVE

Nonunion and significant subsidence after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) are associated with poor clinical outcomes, which occasionally lead to revision surgery. Allograft and polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages are the two most commonly used interbody spacer devices for ACDF. Although studies have been conducted to compare the efficacies of these two interbody materials, the question remains regarding the superiority of one over the other. Therefore, the authors conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare nonunion, subsidence, and reoperation rates after ACDF using allograft and PEEK cages as interbody devices.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the authors systematically searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for studies published prior to November 2023 that compared the efficacy and safety of allograft and PEEK cages for ACDF. A pooled analysis was designed to identify differences in nonunion, subsidence, and reoperation rates between the two interbody devices.

RESULTS

Ten studies involving 1462 patients (allograft, 852 patients; PEEK cage, 610 patients) were included. The pooled analysis demonstrated that allograft had a significantly lower rate of nonunion compared to that of PEEK cages (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14-0.79; p = 0.01). Furthermore, the reoperation rate due to nonunion was significantly higher with PEEK cages compared to that with allograft (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.11-0.71; p < 0.01), whereas the reoperation rate due to overall causes did not display significant results (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.11-1.29; p = 0.12). The incidence of significant subsidence (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.28-1.55; p = 0.34) and the mean amount of subsidence (standard mean difference 0.03, 95% CI -0.42 to 0.47; p = 0.90) did not demonstrate significant differences between allograft and PEEK cages.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the current meta-analysis suggests the advantages of allograft over PEEK cages used for ACDF, due to an enhanced fusion rate and minimized revision risk, with no increase in the risk of subsidence.