This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by MCAFEE, P. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by MCAFEE, P. C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American) 81:859-80 (1999)
© 1999 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.

Current Concepts Review

Current Concepts Review - Interbody Fusion Cages in Reconstructive Operations on the Spine*

PAUL C. MCAFEE, M.D.{ddagger}, TOWSON, MARYLAND

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.


   Introduction
 
During the last five years, surgeons around the world have inserted more than 80,000 lumbar interbody fusion cages; in the United States alone, an estimated 5000 such devices are implanted each month. The recent interest in performing lumbar interbody arthrodesis with use of cages is attributable to three factors: the high rate of failure associated with use of bone graft alone3,22,26,45,46,71,82,84,94,96,106,107; the high rate of failure associated with use of posterior pedicle-screw instrumentation39,97,102; and the high rate of success associated with use of so-called stand-alone anterior fusion cages and autogenous bone graft, obviating the need to perform a 360-degree (combined anterior and posterior) lumbar arthrodesis with use of posterior instrumentation77.

The purpose of the current review is to summarize the information in the literature with regard to the background, rationale, indications, techniques, results, and possible future developments of interbody arthrodesis for reconstruction of the spine.


   Background
 
Early techniques . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am. J. Neuroradiol.Home page
A. L. Williams, M. F. Gornet, and J. K. Burkus
CT Evaluation of Lumbar Interbody Fusion: Current Concepts
AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., September 1, 2005; 26(8): 2057 - 2066.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JBJSHome page
D. Togawa, T. W. Bauer, I. H. Lieberman, and H. Sakai
Lumbar Intervertebral Body Fusion Cages: Histological Evaluation of Clinically Failed Cages Retrieved from Humans
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., January 1, 2004; 86(1): 70 - 79.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]