To delineate the research paradigm, hotspots, and trends of 3D-printed interbody fusion cages (3D-IFCs) globally, providing evidence-based references for academic research, clinical translation, and implant development. Literatures on 3D-IFCs published between January 1, 2014, and December 21, 2025, were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection. Bibliometric analysis, VOSviewer visualization, Poisson regression modeling (AIC=38, BIC=38.4), and network analyses were used to dissect developmental trends. A total of 41 eligible literatures were included. Annual publications showed a significant upward trend, with the Poisson model predicting >25 articles/year post-2026. China led in publications (21 articles, 51.2%) and citations (203, h-index=8), followed by the US (8 articles, 134 citations). Top journals included International Journal of Bioprinting (7 articles). Four core thematic clusters emerged: scaffold materials/porous design, biomechanics/osseointegration, degradable materials/tissue engineering, and 3D printing biomedical applications—with recent focus on clinical adaptability. 3D-IFC research is expanding rapidly, with China as a key contributor. Core frontiers include material-structure-function adaptability, degradable composite scaffolds, and 3D printing process optimization—all linked to improving clinical fusion efficacy and reducing postoperative complications. This study provides evidence-based guidance for grant proposals, R&D prioritization, and technology transfer.

Ning Zhang, Tianhao Sun, Yanan Jia, Weiwei  Pei, Pengfei Han, Yuan Li. Research Hotspots and Trends of 3D-Printed Interbody Fusion Cages: A Bibliometric and Visualization Analysis. Frontiers in Medical Science Research (2026), Vol. 8, Issue 2: 1-14. https://doi.org/10.25236/FMSR.2026.080201.

[1] WANG Z, ZHANG DZ, ZHANG ZP, et al. The postoperative clinical effects of utilizing 3D printed (Ti6Al4V) interbody fusion cages in posterior lumbar fusion: a retrospective cohort study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2024;103(25):e38431.

[2] EGAN P, WANG XY, GREUTERT H, et al. Mechanical and biological characterization of 3D printed lattices. 3D Printing and Additive Manufacturing. 2019;6(2):73–81.

[3] SHUAI H, JIANG XH, LEI L, et al. Biomechanical analysis of 3D printed porous extremely-low modulus Ti-24Nb-4Zr-8Sn lumbar interbody fusion cage-a finite element study. Materials Technology. 2024;39(1):2345960.

[4] SHIH CM, LEE CH, CHEN KH, et al. Optimizing spinal fusion cage design to improve bone substitute filling on varying disc heights: a 3D printing study. Bioengineering (Basel). 2023;10(11):1250.

[5]  ZHANG YF, KANG MJ, SU SH. Finite element analysis of 3D printed stand-alone transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion cages under various loadings. In: Proceedings of ASME 2023 International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition; 2023.

[6] HAN X, GAO Y, DING YL, et al. In vitro performance of 3D printed PCL-β-TCP degradable spinal fusion cage. Journal of Biomaterials Applications. 2021;35(10):1304–1314.

[7] HUANG SF, CHANG CM, LIAO CY, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of an osteoporotic anatomical 3D printed posterior lumbar interbody fusion cage with internal lattice design based on weighted topology optimization. International Journal of Bioprinting. 2023;9(3):11–12.

[8] ZHAI WJ, LIU L, GAO YH, et al. Application of 3D-printed porous titanium interbody fusion cage vs. polyether ether ketone interbody fusion cage in anterior cervical discectomy and fusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis update. Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine. 2024;28(1):290.

[9] VOLPE RH, MISTRY D, PATEL VV, et al. Dynamically crystalizing liquid-crystal elastomers for an expandable endplate-conforming interbody fusion cage. Advanced Healthcare Materials. 2020;9(1):1901136.

[10] JIAO ZW, CHI PF, ZOU HL, et al. Manufacturing and degrading features of 3D-printed porous spinal interbody fusion cages. International Journal of Bioprinting. 2024;10(4):1996.

[11] QI JL, GONG YP, CHEN HH, et al. Design and 3D printing of interbody fusion cage based on TPMS porous structure. Applied Sciences (Basel). 2021;11(23):11149.

[12] CHEN S, MENG Y, WU GZ, et al. Biomechanical properties of 3D-printed cervical interbody fusion cage with novel SF/nHAp composites. Frontiers in Materials. 2021;8:719536.

[13] LIANG H, TU JY, WANG BJ, et al. Improved osseointegration and segmental stability of 3D-printed porous tantalum cages with micro-scale structures for spinal fusion. International Journal of Bioprinting. 2025;11(1):517–531.

[14] LIANG H, TU JY, WANG BJ, et al. Innovative 3D-printed porous tantalum cage with non-window design to accelerate spinal fusion: a proof-of-concept study. Materials Today Bio. 2025;31:101576.

[15] LIM KM, PARK TH, LEE SJ, et al. Design and biomechanical verification of additive manufactured composite spinal cage composed of porous titanium cover and PEEK body. Applied Sciences (Basel). 2019;9(20):4258.

[16] GBD 2021 Low Back Pain Collaborators. Global, regional and national burden of low back pain, 1990–2021. The Lancet Rheumatology. 2023;5(7):e389–e420.