Show source-provided references
1. Titanium (Ti) scaffolds may be superior to polyetheretherketone (PEEK) scaffolds in lumbar interbody fusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and radiological outcomes of spinal interbody fusions using Ti versus PEEK scaffolds
10.1007/s00586-021-06748-w ↗2. Biomechanics of Lumbar Cortical Screw-Rod Fixation Versus Pedicle Screw-Rod Fixation with and Without Interbody Support
10.1097/BRS.0b013e318279a95e ↗3. Polyetheretherketone Versus Titanium Scaffolds for Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Meta-Analysis and Review of the Literature
10.14245/ns.2040058.029 ↗4. Relationship between the elastic modulus of the scaffold material and the biomechanical properties of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: A logarithmic regression analysis based on parametric finite element simulations
10.1016/j.cmpb.2021.106570 ↗6. P LIF surgery with titanium-coated PEEK or uncoated PEEK scaffolds: A prospective randomised clinical and radiological study
10.1007/s00586-020-06642-x ↗7. Osteoblasts exhibit a more differentiated phenotype and increased bone morphogenetic protein production on titanium alloy substrates than on poly-ether-ether-ketone
10.1016/j.spinee.2012.02.002 ↗9. Porous fusion scaffold design via integrated global-local topology optimization and biomechanical analysis of performance
10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.103982 ↗10. Computational comparison of three posterior lumbar interbody fusion techniques by using porous titanium interbody scaffolds with 50% porosity
10.1016/j.compbiomed.2016.01.024 ↗12. Impact of mechanical stability on the progress of bone ongrowth on the frame surfaces of a titanium-coated PEEK scaffold and a 3D porous titanium alloy scaffold: In vivo analysis using CT color mapping
10.1007/s00586-020-06673-4 ↗13. Finite element study on the influence of pore size and structure on stress shielding effect of additive manufactured spinal scaffold
10.1080/10255842.2021.1970142 ↗15. Biomechanical investigation into the structural design of porous additive manufactured scaffolds using numerical and experimental approaches
10.1016/j.compbiomed.2016.06.016 ↗17. Analysis of the physiological load on lumbar vertebrae in patients with osteoporosis: A finite-element study
10.1038/s41598-022-15241-3 ↗18. Biomechanical Evaluation of Stand-Alone Oblique Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion Under 3 Different Bone Mineral Density Conditions: A Finite Element Analysis
10.1016/j.wneu.2021.08.049 ↗20. Biomechanical Evaluation of Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Coflex-F and Pedicle Screw Fixation: Finite Element Analysis of Static and Vibration Conditions
10.1111/os.13425 ↗22. Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion Versus Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Finite Element Analysis of the Vibration Characteristics of Fused Lumbar Spine
10.1016/j.wneu.2021.02.094 ↗23. Biomechanical Analysis of Porous Additive Manufactured Scaffolds for Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion: A Finite Element Analysis
10.1016/j.wneu.2017.12.127 ↗24. Finite element model predicts the biomechanical performance of transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with various porous additive manufactured scaffolds
10.1016/j.compbiomed.2018.02.016 ↗27. Biomechanical role of cement augmentation in the vibration characteristics of the osteoporotic lumbar spine after lumbar interbody fusion
10.1007/s10856-022-06671-6 ↗28. Biomechanical role of osteoporosis affects the incidence of adjacent segment disease after percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy
10.1186/s13018-019-1166-1 ↗29. Liu, Z.-X., Gao, Z.-W., Chen, C., Liu, Z.-Y., Cai, X.-Y., Ren, Y.-N., Sun, X., Ma, X.-L., Du, C.-F., and Yang, Q. (2022). Effects of osteoporosis on the biomechanics of various supplemental fixations co-applied with oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF): A finite element analysis. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord., 23.
10.1186/s12891-022-05645-7 ↗30. Liu, X., Ma, J., Park, P., Huang, X., Xie, N., and Ye, X. (2017). Biomechanical comparison of multilevel lateral interbody fusion with and without supplementary instrumentation: A three-dimensional finite element study. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord., 18.
10.1186/s12891-017-1387-6 ↗32. Biomechanical analysis of segmental lumbar lordosis and risk of scaffold subsidence with different scaffold heights and alternative placements in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion
10.1080/10255842.2020.1737027 ↗34. Stress analysis of the implants in transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion under static and vibration loadings: A comparison between pedicle screw fixation system with rigid and flexible rods
10.1007/s10856-019-6320-0 ↗35. Characteristics and Efficacy of a New 3-Dimensional Printed Mesh Structure Titanium Alloy Spacer for Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion
10.3928/01477447-20170810-04 ↗36. Early Outcomes of Three-Dimensional–Printed Porous Titanium versus Polyetheretherketone Cage Implantation for Stand-Alone Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion in the Treatment of Symptomatic Adjacent Segment Degeneration
10.1016/j.wneu.2021.11.122 ↗37. Tsai, P.I., Wu, M.H., Li, Y.Y., Lin, T.H., Tsai, J.S.C., Huang, H.I., Lai, H.J., Lee, M.H., and Chen, C.Y. (2021). Additive-manufactured Ti-6Al-4V/Polyetheretherketone composite porous cage for Interbody fusion: Bone growth and biocompatibility evaluation in a porcine model. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord., 22.
10.1186/s12891-021-04022-0 ↗38. Bony ingrowth potential of 3D-printed porous titanium alloy: A direct comparison of interbody cage materials in an in vivo ovine lumbar fusion model
10.1016/j.spinee.2018.02.018 ↗39. Can activated titanium interbody cages accelerate or enhance spinal fusion? A review of the literature and a design for clinical trials
10.1007/s10856-021-06628-1 ↗