Structural Allograft versus Polyetheretherketone Implants in Patients Undergoing Spinal Fusion Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE

Interbody spacers have been successfully used in spinal fusion procedures with the aim to restore disc height, provide stability, and promote bone fusion. The authors evaluated the efficacy of structural body allograft versus polyetheretherketone (PEEK) implants in patients undergoing spinal fusion surgery.

METHODS

A systematic review of electronic databases was conducted using different Medical Subject Headings terms from January 1970 to August 2019. Pooled and subgroup analyses were performed using random-effects and fixed-effects models based on I heterogeneity.

RESULTS

The analysis included 6640 patients (structural allograft 64% and PEEK cage 36%) from 7 comparative studies. There were no statistically significant differences in age (P = 0.27), sex (P = 0.31), body mass index (P = 0.82), and smoking status (P = 0.27) between the 2 groups. Overall, the mean follow-up was 12.9 ± 1.5 months. Pooled meta-analysis revealed that patients with structural allograft had 2.59-fold higher likelihood of fusion compared with patients with PEEK cages (odds ratio [OR] 2.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-6.57, P = 0.05) at last follow-up evaluation. Patients with structural allograft had 61% less likelihood of pseudarthrosis (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.15-0.98, P = 0.05) and 74% lower incidence of reoperation compared with patients with PEEK implants (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.09-0.79, P = 0.02). Our results suggest that patients with structural allografts had a higher subsidence rate compared with patients with PEEK implants, but this was statistically insignificant (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.45-2.53, P = 0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results corroborate that structural allografts are highly effective in promoting bony fusion compared with PEEK implants in patients undergoing spinal fusion surgery.

Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.