Skip to main content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to content

Try the next-generation Data Catalog at catalog-beta.data.gov and help shape it with your feedback.

Biomechanical evaluation of immediate stability with rectangular versus cylindrical interbody cages in stabilization of the lumbar spine

Metadata Updated: September 6, 2025

Background Recent cadaver studies show stability against axial rotation with a cylindrical cage is marginally superior to a rectangular cage. The purpose of this biomechanical study in cadaver spine was to evaluate the stability of a new rectangular titanium cage design, which has teeth similar to the threads of cylindrical cages to engage the endplates.

      Methods
      Ten motion segments (five L2-3, five L4-5) were tested. From each cadaver spine, one motion segment was fixed with a pair of cylindrical cages (BAK, Sulzer Medica) and the other with paired rectangular cages (Rotafix, Corin Spinal). Each specimen was tested in an unconstrained state, after cage introduction and after additional posterior translaminar screw fixation. The range of motion (ROM) in flexion-extension, lateral bending, and rotation was tested in a materials testing machine, with +/- 5 Nm cyclical load over 10 sec per cycle; data from the third cycle was captured for analysis.


      Results
      ROM in all directions was significantly reduced (p < 0.05) with both types of cages. There was no significant difference in reduction of ROM in flexion-extension (p = 0.6) and rotation (p = 0.92) between the two cage groups, but stability in lateral bending was marginally superior with the rectangular cages (p = 0.11). Additional posterior fixation further reduced the ROM significantly (p < 0.05) in most directions in both cage groups, but did not show any difference between the cage groups.


      Conclusions
      There was no significant difference in immediate stability in any direction between the threaded cylindrical cage and the new design of the rectangular cage with endplate teeth.

Access & Use Information

Public: This dataset is intended for public access and use. License: No license information was provided. If this work was prepared by an officer or employee of the United States government as part of that person's official duties it is considered a U.S. Government Work.

Downloads & Resources

Dates

Metadata Created Date July 24, 2025
Metadata Updated Date September 6, 2025

Metadata Source

Harvested from Healthdata.gov

Additional Metadata

Resource Type Dataset
Metadata Created Date July 24, 2025
Metadata Updated Date September 6, 2025
Publisher National Institutes of Health
Maintainer
NIH
Identifier https://healthdata.gov/api/views/hik6-xbip
Data First Published 2025-07-14
Data Last Modified 2025-09-06
Category NIH
Public Access Level public
Bureau Code 009:25
Metadata Context https://project-open-data.cio.gov/v1.1/schema/catalog.jsonld
Metadata Catalog ID https://healthdata.gov/data.json
Schema Version https://project-open-data.cio.gov/v1.1/schema
Catalog Describedby https://project-open-data.cio.gov/v1.1/schema/catalog.json
Harvest Object Id ed8fbdf6-1270-4a7e-8e08-28a80fc660f5
Harvest Source Id 651e43b2-321c-4e4c-b86a-835cfc342cb0
Harvest Source Title Healthdata.gov
Homepage URL https://healthdata.gov/d/hik6-xbip
Program Code 009:048
Source Datajson Identifier True
Source Hash 8690cfc0a906d9fb2c3d58e8437664f8e6fe82c0f11a77b462f1daec7ce1f1be
Source Schema Version 1.1

Didn't find what you're looking for? Suggest a dataset here.