Abstract：
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.
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.
摘要：
目的：比较3D打印多孔钛（3D-PPT）融合器与聚醚醚酮（PEEK）融合器治疗腰椎退行性疾病（LDD）的安全性和放射学有效性。
方法：本研究在PROSPERO（CRD42023461511）注册。我们系统地搜索了PubMed,Embase和WebofScience数据库从开始到2023年9月3日的相关研究。使用ReviewManager5.3进行这项荟萃分析。再手术率，并发症发生率,使用相对危险度和95%置信区间评估融合率和沉降率.
结果：包括10篇文章，报道了9项比较LIF和3D-PPT笼与PEEK笼治疗LDD的研究。3D-PPT笼中1年随访时的沉降率明显低于PEEK笼中的沉降率。在6个月的随访中，3D-PPT笼中的融合率明显高于PEEK笼中的融合率。在12个月的随访中，两组之间没有显着差异。两组在并发症发生率和再手术率方面没有显着差异。3D-PPT笼具有降低并发症发生率和再手术率的趋势。
结论：与PEEK笼相比，3D-PPT笼可能是更安全的植入物。3D-PPT笼具有较高的融合率和较低的沉降率。3D-PPT融合器可以加速椎间融合过程，提高融合质量，防止沉降的发生。
方法：本研究在PROSPERO（CRD42023461511）注册。我们系统地搜索了PubMed,Embase和WebofScience数据库从开始到2023年9月3日的相关研究。使用ReviewManager5.3进行这项荟萃分析。再手术率，并发症发生率,使用相对危险度和95%置信区间评估融合率和沉降率.
结果：包括10篇文章，报道了9项比较LIF和3D-PPT笼与PEEK笼治疗LDD的研究。3D-PPT笼中1年随访时的沉降率明显低于PEEK笼中的沉降率。在6个月的随访中，3D-PPT笼中的融合率明显高于PEEK笼中的融合率。在12个月的随访中，两组之间没有显着差异。两组在并发症发生率和再手术率方面没有显着差异。3D-PPT笼具有降低并发症发生率和再手术率的趋势。
结论：与PEEK笼相比，3D-PPT笼可能是更安全的植入物。3D-PPT笼具有较高的融合率和较低的沉降率。3D-PPT融合器可以加速椎间融合过程，提高融合质量，防止沉降的发生。
