Cargando…

Comparison of the PEEK cage and an autologous cage made from the lumbar spinous process and laminae in posterior lumbar interbody fusion

BACKGROUND: A prospective cohort study was performed to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes following posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in patients treated with a PEEK cage compared to those treated with an autologous cage using the lumbar spinous process and laminae (ACSP). METHO...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lin, Bin, Yu, Hui, Chen, Zhida, Huang, Zhuanzhi, Zhang, Wenbin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5004315/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27577978
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-016-1237-y
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: A prospective cohort study was performed to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes following posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in patients treated with a PEEK cage compared to those treated with an autologous cage using the lumbar spinous process and laminae (ACSP). METHODS: Sixty-nine consecutive patients with lumbar degenerative disc disease were randomly assigned to either a PEEK cage (group A, n = 34) or an ACSP (group B, n = 35). Monosegmental PLIF was performed in all patients. Mean lumbar lordosis, mean disc height, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, functional outcomes, fusion rates and complication rates were recorded and compared. The patients were followed postoperatively for a minimum of 2 years. RESULTS: Successful radiographic fusion was documented in all patients. No flexion–extension hypermobility or pedicle screw loosening or breakage occurred during the follow-up period. No significant difference existed between the 2 groups when comparing the mean lumbar lordosis, mean disc height, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, functional outcomes, fusion rates or complication rates. Overall satisfactory results were achieved in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that the ACSP appears to be equally as safe and effective as the PEEK cage. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN25558534. Retrospectively registered 16/02/2016.