Surface Material | Advantages | Disadvantages |
Interbody | ||
Titanium/HA-coated titanium/other surface-treated titanium | Strong biomechanical profile, biocompatible, and well studied | High stiffness increases risk of subsidence |
Titanium-PEEK | Good fusion profile and radiolucent on imaging | Poor wear resistance, limited clinical data, and risk of delamination |
PEEK | Radiolucent and biomechanical profile similar to native bone | Poor wear resistance, inferior fusion rate relative to auto/allograft, and fibrous scar formation |
Silicon nitride | Low infection risk and good osseointegration | High cost, limited clinical data, and brittle |
Tantalum | High fusion rate/biocompatibility | Radiopaque, difficult machining, and high cost |
Pedicle Screws | ||
Roughened titanium | Improved osseointegration and pullout threshold | Lacking human clinical data |
HA-coated screws | Improved osseointegration and pullout threshold | Lacking long-term randomized controlled trials |
Carbon-fiber-PEEK | Radiolucent with reduced artifact in postoperative imaging | High cost and low availability; similar risk of loosening compared with traditional screws |
Gold nanoparticle | Improved osseointegration | Lacking human clinical data |
Silver nanoparticle | Decreased risk of infection | Lacking human clinical data |
Abbreviations: HA, hydroxyapatite; PEEK, polyetheretherketone.