Three dimensional printed patient-specific PEEK versus titanium mesh cage for anterior column reconstruction after spondylectomy for spinal tumours: a prospective controlled cohort study.
Int OrthopSep 3, 2026 (epub)
Nikta Zaborovskii, Sergei Masevnin, Dmitrii Ptashnikov et al.
✦ AI-curated · Sources linked
In 30 seconds
This prospective controlled cohort study compared subsidence rates at 12 months following vertebral body replacement (VBR) using 3D-printed patient-specific PEEK implants versus titanium mesh cages in adults with thoracic or lumbar spine tumors. Among 53 patients, subsidence occurred in 3.7% of the PEEK group compared to 42.3% in the titanium mesh group (p < 0.001).
Key findings
- Subsidence rates were 3.7% for PEEK implants versus 42.3% for titanium mesh cages (p < 0.001).
- Endplate mismatch > 10° was absent in the PEEK group compared to 46% in the titanium mesh group (p < 0.001).
- 96% of PEEK patients achieved Brantigan-Steffee grade 4-5 at 12 months versus 73% for titanium mesh (p = 0.16).
- Quality of life scores were significantly higher in the PEEK group at three and six months (p = 0.006 and p = 0.014).
Why it matters
The study highlights the potential advantages of 3D-printed PEEK implants over traditional titanium mesh cages in reducing subsidence rates and improving early quality of life outcomes in patients undergoing VBR after spondylectomy for spinal tumors.