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.

Clinical Significance of Redundant Nerve Roots in Patients with Lumbar Stenosis Undergoing Minimally Invasive Tubular Decompression

OBJECTIVE

Symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a common indication for surgery in the elderly. Preoperative radiographic evaluation of patients with LSS often reveals redundant nerve roots (RNRs). The clinical significance of RNRs is uncertain. RNRs have not been studied in the setting of minimally invasive surgery. This study investigates the relationship between RNRs and clinical outcomes after minimally invasive tubular decompression.

METHODS

Chart review was performed for patients with degenerative LSS who underwent minimally invasive decompression. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging parameters were assessed, and patient-reported outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients underwent surgery performed at an average of 1.8 ± 0.8 spinal levels. Thirty-one patients (57%) had RNRs. Patients with RNRs were older (median = 72 years vs. 66 years, P = 0.050), had longer median symptom duration (32 months vs. 15 months, P < 0.01), and had more levels operated on (2.1 vs. 1.4; P < 0.01). The median follow-up after surgery was 2 months (range = 1.3-12 months). Preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcomes were similar based on RNR presence. Patients without RNRs had larger lumbar cross-sectional areas (CSAs) (median = 121 mm² vs. 95 mm², P = 0.014) and the index-level CSA (52 mm² vs. 34 mm², P = 0.007). The CSA was not correlated with RNR morphology or location.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative RNRs are associated with increased age, symptom duration, and lumbar stenosis severity. Patients improved after minimally invasive decompression regardless of RNR presence. RNR presence had no effect on short-term clinical outcomes. Further study is required to assess their long-term significance.