Literature DB >> 26072198

Static and dynamic fatigue behavior of topology designed and conventional 3D printed bioresorbable PCL cervical interbody fusion devices.

Ashleen R Knutsen1, Sean L Borkowski1, Edward Ebramzadeh2, Colleen L Flanagan3, Scott J Hollister4, Sophia N Sangiorgio5.   

Abstract

Recently, as an alternative to metal spinal fusion cages, 3D printed bioresorbable materials have been explored; however, the static and fatigue properties of these novel cages are not well known. Unfortunately, current ASTM testing standards used to determine these properties were designed prior to the advent of bioresorbable materials for cages. Therefore, the applicability of these standards for bioresorbable materials is unknown. In this study, an image-based topology and a conventional 3D printed bioresorbable poly(ε)-caprolactone (PCL) cervical cage design were tested in compression, compression-shear, and torsion, to establish their static and fatigue properties. Difficulties were in fact identified in establishing failure criteria and in particular determining compressive failure load. Given these limitations, under static loads, both designs withstood loads of over 650 N in compression, 395 N in compression-shear, and 0.25 Nm in torsion, prior to yielding. Under dynamic testing, both designs withstood 5 million (5M) cycles of compression at 125% of their respective yield forces. Geometry significantly affected both the static and fatigue properties of the cages. The measured compressive yield loads fall within the reported physiological ranges; consequently, these PCL bioresorbable cages would likely require supplemental fixation. Most importantly, supplemental testing methods may be necessary beyond the current ASTM standards, to provide more accurate and reliable results, ultimately improving preclinical evaluation of these devices.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ASTM testing; Bioresorbable cages; Fatigue properties; Interbody fusion; Spine fusion; Structural properties

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26072198      PMCID: PMC4490041          DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2015.05.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mech Behav Biomed Mater        ISSN: 1878-0180


  28 in total

1.  Numerical modeling of bone tissue adaptation--a hierarchical approach for bone apparent density and trabecular structure.

Authors:  P G Coelho; P R Fernandes; H C Rodrigues; J B Cardoso; J M Guedes
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2009-03-09       Impact factor: 2.712

Review 2.  Spine update lumbar interbody cages.

Authors:  B K Weiner; R D Fraser
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1998-03-01       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Analysis and measurement of neck loads.

Authors:  S P Moroney; A B Schultz; J A Miller
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 3.494

4.  Bone tissue engineering using polycaprolactone scaffolds fabricated via selective laser sintering.

Authors:  Jessica M Williams; Adebisi Adewunmi; Rachel M Schek; Colleen L Flanagan; Paul H Krebsbach; Stephen E Feinberg; Scott J Hollister; Suman Das
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2005-01-23       Impact factor: 12.479

5.  Biomechanical comparison of cervical spine interbody fusion cages.

Authors:  F Kandziora; R Pflugmacher; J Schäfer; C Born; G Duda; N P Haas; T Mittlmeier
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2001-09-01       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  In vitro biomechanical investigation of the stability and stress-shielding effect of lumbar interbody fusion devices.

Authors:  M Kanayama; B W Cunningham; C J Haggerty; K Abumi; K Kaneda; P C McAfee
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 5.115

7.  A prospective randomized multicenter clinical evaluation of an anterior cervical fusion cage.

Authors:  R J Hacker; J C Cauthen; T J Gilbert; S L Griffith
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-10-15       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Fabrication of poly(propylene fumarate)-based orthopaedic implants by photo-crosslinking through transparent silicone molds.

Authors:  Mark D Timmer; Cory Carter; Catherine G Ambrose; Antonios G Mikos
Journal:  Biomaterials       Date:  2003-11       Impact factor: 12.479

9.  Sterilization and strength of 70/30 polylactide cages: e-beam versus ethylene oxide.

Authors:  Theo H Smit; Kevin A Thomas; Roel J W Hoogendoorn; Gustav J Strijkers; Marco N Helder; Paul I J M Wuisman
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2007-04-01       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  A prospective randomized comparison between the cloward procedure and a carbon fiber cage in the cervical spine: a clinical and radiologic study.

Authors:  Ludek Vavruch; Rune Hedlund; Davood Javid; Waclaw Leszniewski; Adel Shalabi
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2002-08-15       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  3 in total

1.  Design of mulitlevel OLF approach ("V"-shaped decompressive laminoplasty) based on 3D printing technology.

Authors:  Qinjie Ling; Erxing He; Hanbin Ouyang; Jing Guo; Zhixun Yin; Wenhua Huang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-07-27       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 2.  The advances of topology optimization techniques in orthopedic implants: A review.

Authors:  Naichao Wu; Shan Li; Boyan Zhang; Chenyu Wang; Bingpeng Chen; Qing Han; Jincheng Wang
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2021-08-07       Impact factor: 2.602

Review 3.  Biomaterials for Interbody Fusion in Bone Tissue Engineering.

Authors:  Han Zhang; Zhonghan Wang; Yang Wang; Zuhao Li; Bo Chao; Shixian Liu; Wangwang Luo; Jianhang Jiao; Minfei Wu
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-05-17
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.