Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Clin Spine Surg. 2016 Aug;29(7):E371-5. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0b013e318277cb9b.

Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) Rods in Lumbar Spine Degenerative Disease: A Case Series.

Author information

1
Department of Neurosurgery, New York Medical College, Valhalla, NY.

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN:

Retrospective case series.

OBJECTIVE:

The purpose of our study was to retrospectively review the results of posterior lumbar fusion using polyetheretherketone (PEEK) rods.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA:

Pedicle screw and rod instrumentation has become the preferred technique for performing stabilization and fusion in the lumbar spine for degenerative disease. Rigid fixation with titanium rods leads to high fusion rates, but may also contribute to stress shielding and adjacent segment degeneration (ASD). Thus, some have advocated using semirigid rods made of PEEK. Although the biomechanical properties of PEEK rods have shown improved stress-shielding characteristics and anterior load-sharing properties, there are very few clinical studies evaluating their application in the lumbar spine.

METHODS:

We evaluated a retrospective cohort of 42 patients who underwent posterior lumbar fusion from 2007 to 2009 for the treatment of lumbar spine degenerative disease using PEEK rods. Reoperation rate was the primary outcome evaluated. Fusion rate was also evaluated.

RESULTS:

Eight of the 42 patients with PEEK rods required reoperation. Reasons for reoperation mainly included ASD (5/8) and nonunion with cage migration (3/8). Radiographically, documented fusion rate was 86%. Mean follow-up was 31.4 months. No statistical differences were found in fusion rates or reoperation between age above 55 years and younger than 55 years (P=1.00), male and female (P=0.110), single or multilevel fusion (P=0.67), and fusion with and without an interbody graft (P=0.69). Smokers showed a trend towards increased risk of reoperation for ASD or instrumentation failure (P=0.056).

CONCLUSIONS:

PEEK rods demonstrate a similar fusion and reoperation rate in comparison to other instrumentation modalities in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spine disease.

PMID:
23075859
DOI:
10.1097/BSD.0b013e318277cb9b
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Wolters Kluwer
Loading ...
Support Center