To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

ISASS 2016: 1-yr results silicon nitride device vs. PEEK cages with autograft in ACDF

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Ace Report Cover
April 2016

ISASS 2016: 1-yr results silicon nitride device vs. PEEK cages with autograft in ACDF

Vol: 5| Issue: 4| Number:37| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Randomized Trial
OE Level Evidence:N/A
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

Porous Silicon Nitride Spacers versus PEEK Cages with Autograft: 12 Month Data from the CASCADE Randomized Trial

Contributing Authors:
M Arts J Wolfs T Corbin

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

CONFERENCE ACE REPORTS

This ACE Report is a summary of a conference presentation or abstract. The information provided has limited the ability to provide an accurate assessment of the risk of bias or the overall quality. Please interpret the results with caution as trials may be in progress and select results may have been presented.

Synopsis

96 patients with radicular symptoms due to single-level disc herniation and/or osteophytes of the cervical spine and scheduled for anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) were randomized to undergo the procedure with either a polyetheretherketone cage filled with autograft, or a silicon nitride spacer containing porous silicon nitride without graft material. The study was conducted in order...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.