Comparison of Lumbar Interbody Fusion with 3D-Printed Porous Titanium Cage Versus Polyetheretherketone Cage in Treating Lumbar Degenerative Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

- OBJECTIVE: 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. - METHODS: 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. - RESULTS: 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 3DPPT 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 6month 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 3DPPT cage. - CONCLUSIONS: 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.